Slashdot Mirror


Ubisoft Blames Piracy For Non-Release of PC Game

New submitter Azmodan sends this excerpt from TorrentFreak: "Ubisoft is known for laying the blame for many problems on the unauthorized downloading of its games. Stanislas Mettra, creative director of the upcoming game I Am Alive, confirms this once again by saying that the decision not to release a PC version is a direct result of widespread game piracy. However, those who look beyond the propaganda will see that there appears to be more to the story than that." Another Ubisoft employee made similar comments about upcoming Ghost Recon games. Regarding Ghost Recon Online being free-to-play: "We are giving away most of the content for free because there’s no barrier to entry. To the users that are traditionally playing the game by getting it through Pirate Bay, we said, 'Okay, go ahead guys. This is what you’re asking for. We’ve listened to you – we’re giving you this experience. It’s easy to download, there’s no DRM that will pollute your experience.'" Regarding Future Soldier having no PC version: "When we started Ghost Recon Online we were thinking about Ghost Recon: Future Solider; having something ported in the classical way without any deep development, because we know that 95% of our consumers will pirate the game. So we said okay, we have to change our mind."

424 comments

  1. They can keep them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    All this means is that Ubisoft makes me proud to never have pirated or bought any of their games. Apparently they are of so low quality that they themselves does not belive in them.

    1. Re:They can keep them by BobSutan · · Score: 5, Interesting
      --
      "On a scale from 1 to 10, people are stupid"
    2. Re:They can keep them by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The fact that they keep releasing for XBOX and PS3 suggests that they do sell. Piracy is not easy on either of those systems, especially if you want to play online. Digital distribution also prevents people from selling the games second hand or shops discounting them so you can see why they prefer those platforms.

      I think there are other reasons than just people wanting stuff for free on the PC though. The hardware to play these games is expensive and tends to go from ass-kicking bad boy to doorstop in 2 or 3 years max, which means less money to spend on games. They shittyness of the DRM can't be underestimated either; I wanted to play GTA IV but in the end the nasty copy protection put me off. Same with HAWX, might have bought it on a whim if it were not for the fact that I had to research what the DRM was like then see if anyone released a cracked clean version.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    3. Re:They can keep them by sortius_nod · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. Hacked Xbox 360's can be played online, and it's actually Xbox/ps3 that stop you from selling games 2nd hand with the "online pass" systems.

      If you actually knew anything about what you were talking about you'd realise that piracy across all platforms PC or console is rampant. I'm guessing you work for a console developer and you drank the "pirates are on PC" kool-aid.

    4. Re:They can keep them by ub3r+n3u7r4l1st · · Score: 1

      You are risking a ban on the hardware if you are using a hacked Xbox 360.

    5. Re:They can keep them by Totenglocke · · Score: 1

      Funny, steam stopped me from buying some new games and lead me to pirating instead.

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    6. Re:They can keep them by MelindaM2120 · · Score: 1

      The sky is not so clear at Steam either. There are still severe regional distribution problems with Steam games. For example, Skyrim, the big hit RPG of this month, is available through retail stores in Eastern-Europe but requires Steam activation. However, the game itself cannot be purchased in Eastern-Europe through the Steam store, which raises questions about the availability of future DLC in that part of Europe. Another not so happy example is the Lonesome Road DLC for Fallout:New Vegas. Local distribution is handled (or rather, mishandled) by 1C/Cenega in those countries, and while the first three DLCs are available, Lonesome Road still cannot be purchased if you are so unfortunate that you reside in that 'backwater' region. (Or maybe they are trying to goad customers into buying the Ultimate version of Fallout: New Vegas that will contain all DLCs). If you check the 'No Lonesome Road on Steam" topic on the official Bethesda forums in the New Vegas DLC section, you will see that the last response concerning the subject from Bethsoft was more than a month ago. So while Steam is convenient, and even offers an offline mode if you don't feel like being connected all the time, or you are on a portable rig without permanent net connection, regional distribution, however, is still a mess. And some people, even affluent ones, in that region, who could otherwise afford buying games as they are released, refuse to purchase them, and resort to piracy instead because 'if you treat us like crap, we will treat you like crap'.

    7. Re:They can keep them by MrNthDegree · · Score: 1

      Except software hacks can unban hardware ;-)

    8. Re:They can keep them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are the one company where the DRM and overall attitude has actually changed my mind about buying a game -most recently Settlers7. I had planned to buy it at launch but got spooked so I didn't buy it and I didn't suggest it to any of my friends (also in the target market for that one) so they didn't get it. I might eventually pick it up at shovelware prices when I can afford to consider it an afternoon of throwaway entertainment but maybe not too.

    9. Re:They can keep them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1

      Ubisoft games are notoriously buggy. I don't mind if a game is buggy at release, but Ubisoft stops supporting them so quickly. I love the silent hunter games (and own all of them legally), but the gamestopping A and B severity bugs just kill me. Their answer to this is then to blame the customers, and include a cumbersome DRM system (which then causes more bugs).

      Unisoft needs to stop blaming their customers, and start making games that people will *WANT* to buy.

      The only people I know who pirate games are gaming enthusiasts who really love to play games, but can't afford to buy them all. Maybe the industry needs to consider lowering prices across the board? I know that margins on game development are razor thin, but perhaps this strategy would actually boost revenue?

      If games were $40 standard instead of $60, I know I'd be more likely to buy 2, rather than 1 $60 game. Then there you have it, your customer has just injected 33% more cash into your industry.

  2. Non politically correct comment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    DIE a SLOW and PAINFUL bleeding death ubisoft.

  3. My interpretation... by RogueyWon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ubisoft has gotten itself into such a complete knicker-twist over the PC games market via its groteseque DRM efforts that it wishes to give up on the whole affair as a bad job. But, like the classic stroppy teenager, it wishes to make clear to all and sundry that it's not being sent home in disgrace, it's making its own decision, for its own reasons, to take its ball and go home.

    I am not an anti-DRM fundamentalist. I'm fine with the DRM requirements imposed by the base Steam DRM package, by Xbox Live, and with the exception of a few games (like Bionic Commando), by PSN. That's not to say I am in love with the idea of DRM or even accept it as inevitable. I like the concept behind GoG - particularly of extending it to newer games - and support them where I can. But I'm not going to boycott games over DRM on the basis of an abstract principle. I'm only going to do so where the DRM inconveniences me personally. And Ubisoft's always-on DRM system is the only one (leaving aside a few small EA experiments such as C&C4) to have passed that barrier. My connection tends to blip and reset itself every couple of days - losing 20 minutes of play-time because of it is not acceptable.

    And because it's so offensive, I didn't limit the boycott to not just buying the games on the PC. I skipped the games across all platforms. No Assassin's Creed for me? It's a bit of a pity, but I'll live. I mean, really, I'm not the kind of gamer it's a fantastic idea to be upsetting. I buy 30+ games per year (as you can see from the end-of-year roundups I do in my journal). The last game I pirated was the original Crimson Skies, back in 2000 (and I went on to buy that a month or two later). I always buy new, not second hand, except on the odd occasion when I hear about an old game that I "missed" at release which really appeals to me, and which I can't find new). I'm not sat there moaning about the lack of Linux ports and boycotting anything that has even a sniff of a CD-key. I want to be reasonable.

    The Mettra comments appear to be based on faulty data on PC game sales. They're going only on boxed-copy sales, which have been declining on PC for a decade or more now. What isn't declining are download sales, primarily through Steam but also through a variety of other sources. Even going off simultaneous players-online stats (which will substantially under-estimate actual copies sold), the PC version of Skyrim shifted some pretty epic numbers via Steam.

    It's a slight pity in this case. I Am Alive looks fairly interesting and it's pitched at a price point that tends to fare reasonably well on the PC. But can I live without it? Sure...

    Besides, as we drift to the end of this console cycle, the PC is not the only platform with a piracy problem. Ok, the PS3 has always remained difficult from a piracy perspective. And the 360, while easily hackable, does carry a very high risk of getting an XBL ban. But the Wii, DS, 3DS(?) and PSP are all pretty much wide open these days (and have been for a while in some cases).

    PS. This story has been carried across multiple mainstream gaming media outlets over the last few days - Kotaku, Eurogamer, IGN, 1up etc. Could we try to get a link in TFA that is to a site that won't be blocked by most common workplace filters (ie. not TorrentFreak)?

    1. Re:My interpretation... by AngryDeuce · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And the 360, while easily hackable, does carry a very high risk of getting an XBL ban.

      In all honesty, all the people I know with modded 360's don't connect them to Xbox Live. Many of them actually have two consoles: the one they bought originally that got the RRoD or disc tray errors that, due to being out of warranty anyway, they had repaired and modded at the same time...and the regular one they had to buy to replace it with so they could play on XBL.

      Not speaking for everyone, obviously, but it seems silly to even bother trying to play a modded 360 on XBL. Everyone I know that's tried had their accounts banned pretty quickly years ago, hence nobody even really tried anymore. In my experiences, anyway.

    2. Re:My interpretation... by u-235-sentinel · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "Ubisoft has gotten itself into such a complete knicker-twist over the PC games market via its groteseque DRM efforts that it wishes to give up on the whole affair as a bad job. But, like the classic stroppy teenager, it wishes to make clear to all and sundry that it's not being sent home in disgrace, it's making its own decision, for its own reasons, to take its ball and go home."

      and that's the reason I don't purchase Ubisoft games. Period.

      Their DRM has more than once caused my computer to freak out and force me to reinstall everything over again. I did purchase one years ago and I traced it back to their DRM solution. I gave up and today won't purchase any of their games. If one is a gift I go back to the store and with an unopened product replace it with something else (or just get the refund or credit).

      Too much of a pain and not worth my time troubleshooting their crap.

      --
      Has Comcast disconnected your Internet account? Same here. You can read about it at http://comcastissue.blogspot.com
    3. Re:My interpretation... by rolfwind · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I am not an anti-DRM fundamentalist...

      In other words: "I'm fine getting screwed in the ass when the stuff I paid for no longer plays, just so I can appear reasonable to paranoid and greedy corporations."

      Have fun in 20 years in your DRM future, when everything is under lock and key. Hell, with android's face recognition, it won't be long before you're the only one who can read the article in the magazines/newspapers you subscribe to and if you hand it to someone else the screen will go blank.

    4. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If I wasn't AC and had mod points, I'd spend them on this post even though it's 5 Insightful already. It's bang-on.
       
      I pirate myself, but I also purchase said game if I choose to keep it. I have no issue supporting those that created something I enjoy.

    5. Re:My interpretation... by AngryDeuce · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Hell, with android's face recognition, it won't be long before you're the only one who can read the article in the magazines/newspapers you subscribe to and if you hand it to someone else the screen will go blank.

      Damn right. I read an article a year or so ago (that I can't seem to find now, unfortunately) about patents for ways to use face tracking to ensure you were actually watching the ads being served on your device; if you weren't giving it your full attention, the ad paused until you did. It's not bad enough we have to sit through ads anywhere and everywhere anymore, now we'l have no choice but to watch the things...

    6. Re:My interpretation... by DrXym · · Score: 2
      I think Ubisoft's problems are numerous but the two that spring to mind are a) they don't produce many good games and people know it, and b) PC gamers are averse to DRM at the best of times and inflicting a DRM which needs internet access is plain stupid.

      The stupid part is the PC represents money for old rope. They already have probably 95% of the code and 99% of the assets required to make a PC port from the 360 & PS3 versions so it doesn't make any sense to ignore the market. Port the game, throw it up on steam for a reasonable price and it will happily sell with negligible piracy.

    7. Re:My interpretation... by luther349 · · Score: 1

      you said it. there declining pc sales is not the pirates. for one fps sales as a whole are down as a whole due to a flood of them. i wanted silent hunter 5 and assens creed as well but when they said they where going to have insane drm not just the standard steam drm i skipped both titles. drm only hurts people who buy the games and in this case there sales being everyone on the pc didn't want to deal with that.

    8. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Dude, fuck off. The stuff I paid for plays fine and has always been playing fine ever since I installed Steam so many years ago. Are you anti-DRM chucklefucks so dense that you can't realize that for the most of us, it doesn't inconvenience us at all? The only problem is with extremely shitty DRM like Ubisoft's where you actually can't play if your internet drops for half a second. Steam always works when you ask it to, it doesn't suffer from those stupid issues. Spore is a different deal; it severely limited your ability to play the game if you had a lot of computers. That is annoying DRM. The one that I don't even notice when I launch Skyrim? Fine in my book. VALVe has already said they would unlock the games in case of the company going down (and they have the capability to do so if required)

    9. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      You know, most people won't consider playing a game that's more than a year old. It's ridiculous to consider anyone playing the same game in 10 or 20 years. Only a small selection of games have been good enough to warrant that kind of long-term fanbase, and those types of games aren't made anymore -- they were designed for hardcore PC gamers. Counterstrike, UT2004, Tribes, OFP, and BG2 for example. It's rare to find non-simplified games these days.

    10. Re:My interpretation... by AngryDeuce · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's ridiculous to consider anyone playing the same game in 10 or 20 years.

      Yeah, that explains the lack of emulators, roms, and disc images all over the internet, am I right??

      Moron.

    11. Re:My interpretation... by AngryDeuce · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Same here. I've been burned way too many times buying full-priced games at launch that ended up being buggy pieces of crap or just pieces of crap entirely. There are few developers out there that I trust to release consistently good games. I always test drive before I buy.

      The harder they make it for me to do so, the less inclined I am to buy their game.

    12. Re:My interpretation... by jefe7777 · · Score: 1, Informative

      "chucklefucks"

      a series of subdued and mirthful acts of coitus?

    13. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I asked a few people what "SNES" stood for or what "ROM emulator" meant, and they had no idea. MUDs and roguelikes have more followers than the 8-bit/16-bit games era.

    14. Re:My interpretation... by Jibekn · · Score: 3, Informative

      Do some research, Steve Jobs has(had?) actually applyed for a patent on that very idea.

    15. Re:My interpretation... by Jibekn · · Score: 0

      umad?

    16. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try asking them about Virtual Console, then.

    17. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about this: you go fuck yourself. It's computer games. Christ on a cracker, he's even on your side and that isn't enough for you retards.

    18. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The emulators are a decade old? Really? Could have fooled me.

    19. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am currently playing Mafia on the PC. Came out in 2002.

    20. Re:My interpretation... by anonymov · · Score: 1

      20+ year old ROM dumps which didn't have DRM.

      That's exactly the point.

      Except some of SNES games, for example, used different copy-protection schemes which had to be bypassed and reimplemented for emulation, google earthbound+drm or s-dd1+emulation for some insight.

      Moron.

    21. Re:My interpretation... by silentbrad · · Score: 1

      you're so full of shit your eyes are brown

      My mom's been saying that to me since I was 2.

      Fuck off.

      Usually in a slightly more loving way, though.

    22. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pinball fantasies is still just as fun as it was 20 years ago. I load it up once in a while on my 20 year old A1200. Hm. There are plenty of other games worth playing too. Not to mention all of the games I've missed. Have no idea how I passed up the original Might and Magic series for example.

    23. Re:My interpretation... by shentino · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For me, DRM is fine in theory if the only people you piss off are pirates. The minute you cause trouble for innocent consumers you're crossing the line.

      In practice, however, DRM stops more than just stealing and is used in an anti-competitive manner, and companies that use DRM have so far univerally proven they are willing to abuse it

    24. Re:My interpretation... by shentino · · Score: 1

      The problem isn't with DRM itself as a concept, it's with the fact that vendors abuse it.

      Slippery slope, while a deductive fallacy, has a lot of backing in reality because it makes a damned good inductive argument.

    25. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pointless Nitpick: Earthbound wasn't DRM'd, it was copy protected. It would be nice if we could get back to understanding the difference once again.

    26. Re:My interpretation... by Evtim · · Score: 1

      10 years? Easily....

      Have you ever played heavily modded Rome total war, Civilization 4, Morrowind or Oblivion? I just started new Oblivion game because I've missed a couple of mods that made it to the hall of fame. The added content is larger than the original game (hell, add the 10 most popular mods and you will triple it)! How old is Morrowind? Why are people still making mods for it?

      Add to the above the GTA franchise and you have entertainment for ten bloody years (working, family man here, no kids but still...)!
      In fact I would go so far as to claim that people who play a game for a few weeks only are no real gamers.
      Add to that - no need to upgrade your rig just to spend 50 hours at best on the latest eye candy. Keep two years behind. Especially now when the PC version is the bastard child of every developer. Oblivion is unplayable on PC before mods. With them it is so ahead of the console version that it is ridiculous...

      Steam. One game I have from them - Civilization 5. I hadn't played it for 4 months and tried just yesterday. It did not work, I need to reinstall. Thanks but no thanks. So what about Skyrim? Easy - buy the game in two years. Play the pirated version to avoid steam. If it's impossible well I will live without Skyrim.

      I read in this tread something about bitterness of PC gamers towards consoles. Well, how can I be bitter since I have way more superior experience than a console player (let's not go again into controller vs. mouse discussion. I have a console too for the sole purpose to support the Logitech G25 racing wheel - the only console controller I ever use) ?
      What I am is sad, because the game developers just followed everyone else on the throw-away bandwagon that is sooo heading for a huge crash on civilization level. And anyway, those of us that are old enough to remember different - well, we think about the status of our pension funds already. I don't need to play to survive or even to have fun and I have money to give to those that respect me as a customer. If no-one respects me - tough but I will live without those particular content creators...

      Mark my words - the world will never recover from the last crisis. The West for sure (we were sold wholesale by "our" businessmen and politicians). People who can fork 60 euros for merely 60 hours of "fun" will become ever scarce. What the content distributors and creators are doing right now is suicidal (not only games, but you already know this if you read /.).

    27. Re:My interpretation... by barc0001 · · Score: 2

      That mirrors the experience in my circle of acquaintances. It's like it's accepted that if someone's going to run a hacked Xbox, then no online is part of the price one pays to do that. And many of them do have 2 Xboxes. I actually got a sweet deal on some Xbox 360 hardware a couple of years ago because of the Xbox live ban thing. I wanted to buy a couple of extra controllers and another Rock Band guitar for my 360 and I see some guy who was selling his 360 on Craigslist with a full set of rock band instruments and 2 controllers for $175. I wondered why so cheap so I called him up and apparently he was in a fit of pique because he went to work the day before and his wife accidentally went on XBL without turning on or off some software doodad and got the console banned. So before he could start thinking about what the hardware was actually worth I ran over and bought it off him. So I got my controllers, the extra guitar, re-sold the extra drums for $40, upgraded my Xbox's 20 GB HDD to a 120GB off the new machine, and got basically a free Xbox 360 that sits in my office out of the deal.

    28. Re:My interpretation... by TangoMargarine · · Score: 2

      if you weren't giving it your full attention, the ad paused until you did

      And this is a bad thing? Maybe for interstitial YouTube ads if you can't block them otherwise, but for banners...

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    29. Re:My interpretation... by TangoMargarine · · Score: 1

      You're obviously not a strategy gamer...the best games I play came out before 2001. The upshot of non-FPS games is that there's often actually a point to playing them more than once :-)

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    30. Re:My interpretation... by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      Funnily, I've recently started picking up PS2 JRPGs I always wanted to play. You know, ones that are less then decade old. The PS2 emulators on PC are getting to the point where games play really well.

      Doesn't really fit into your world of raging, but do go on.

    31. Re:My interpretation... by just_a_monkey · · Score: 1, Insightful

      This is nearly gibberish. You should learn the differences between "there", "their" and "where". You can't just pick which you use at random.

      --
      How inappropriate to call this planet Earth, when clearly it is Ocean.
    32. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *ding* Achievement unlocked! First overreacting DRM-as-rape analogy as a response to a reasonable, well-thought-out post!

      But I gotta say, you're slow. I was expecting that sort of extremist bullshit ready to copy-paste before the parent was done typing in the post. Not the FOURTH response afterward.

    33. Re:My interpretation... by Mista2 · · Score: 1

      I have just downloaded steam on my Mac two weeks ago, started portal an a couple of other games, then stean fucked up, and coul no longer start, 8 Ames I couldn't play. Nearly a week before I got a tech response from steam. Had to clear and redownload everything, and reboot. And then I hear steam just gave my credentials away to hackers. No more steam for me. Xbox live I gave up on when I just wanted to play a game and spent 2 hrs waiting for mandatory updates to apply.
      The Mac app store may have it issues, but you get the game, it runs on any Mac, and you don't have to have a net connection for it to work. I don't mind it's DRM so much, I can tolerate it.
      The issue is the cost of new release games, that's more than just an impulse buy. And then have to put up with DRM crap and buggy software!

    34. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hate steam and so do thousands of others.... I've lost count of the number of people asking for how to find cracked executables or versions of games THEY OWN because of that nasty system.

    35. Re:My interpretation... by AngryDeuce · · Score: 1

      All of which are at least a decade old to run 20+ year old ROM dumps which didn't have DRM.

      Moron.

      You really are a moron, aren't you? Keep trollin', trollin' trollin' trollin'....YEAH!

      I was just playing Goldeneye 007 on Project64 a few days ago. I can even use my Xbox 360 controller and edit the control scheme to bring it inline with the current standard FPS control scheme that, when it was released way back in 1997, didn't yet exist (thanks, Halo!). I also recently replayed Final Fantasy III (or Final Fantasy VI, depending on where you're from) on Zsnes, that's from 1994, as well as all the NES-era Mega Man's, which date between 1987-1992. And although I haven't played any recently, I've played quite a few MAME and Coleco/Atari roms as well.

      I did this all on a Q6600 running Windows 7 I built just 4 years ago.

    36. Re:My interpretation... by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      If you could pass the Turing test, it wouldn't matter.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    37. Re:My interpretation... by AngryDeuce · · Score: 1

      What if the software doesn't recognize that I'm watching when I really am? What if I'm blind or too occupied with my eyes to sit there and watch an ad? Like, for instance, if I'm driving down the road and I launch Pandora on my phone, I gotta pull over to watch an ad first while it scans my eyes and makes sure that they're focused on the screen?

      I mean, what next, commercials that pause themselves on your TV if you have the audacity to get up to take a piss on a commercial break? Previews that won't let you watch the DVD you just bought until you devote those 3 minutes of your life to watching the trailer of a movie you don't give a fuck about to watch the one you went out and bought?

      Would you put it past Big Media and their ilk in the software world to shoehorn shit like this into every corner of every device used to consume media on the market? Based on the way things are going, and their desperation due to the continued collapse of their monopolies on entertainment, I wouldn't put anything past these people...

    38. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good luck trying to get Windows 9x era games running today. The old DRM systems employed back then are going to cry "pirate!" regardless of what you do, and that's even before trying to deal with DirectX8.x and earlier.

    39. Re:My interpretation... by shentino · · Score: 1

      DRM is only a problem because vendors don't implement it with the goal of pleasing the consumer.

      They do it with the goal of locking out competition, be it from pirates or unsigned indie game devs, so consumer angst is just acceptable collateral damage.

      Which is why I used the "in theory" qualifier.

    40. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the fuck am I reading?

    41. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some of my favorite strategy games are Crusader Kings, EU3, WitPAE, and SEV actually. Hardcore PC games are dead. They've stopped being produced. In ten years we'll be playing games twenty years old, not games that were made today.

      FYI two of those listed FPS games (Tribes and OFP) required more tactics than most strategy games.

    42. Re:My interpretation... by Cito · · Score: 1
      with Ubisoft's draconian DRM requiring always on and any glitch causes game to exit or crash to desktop

      since they started giving the finger to pc gamers I for one have certainly pirated Ubisoft.

      I go out of my way to pirate ubisoft. I paid for Skyrim, I paid for many other games but when a Ubisoft title comes out I make a point to pirate it.

      For one, pirates get to enjoy the game that works perfectly... pirates remove steam requirements and remove any and all drm in hours. You can play all of Ubisoft's games without steam or any DRM thanks to pirates.

      the funny thing is while pirates get to enjoy a working game, legit customers can't play their games for long without crashes to desktop, memory leaks due to steam issues with the game or overlay crashes.

      If ubisoft would chill out and embrace the pc gamer crowd instead of 2 old obsolete consoles that are shit nowdays then there would be no need to pirate.

      plus pirates do not affect sales, that's been proven so many times in the music and movie industry, cause pirates wouldn't have bought the game/music/movie in the first place. So a person who would not have purchased it in the first place DOES NOT AFFECT SALES because they wouldn't have purchased it anyhow.

      but I damn sure go to http://kat.ph/ or http://demonoid.me/ and download ubisoft's games to play out of protest, cause I certainly would not ever pay for a ubisoft game as the company currently is.

      I understand DRM but check out successful games like the X3 series was shipped with no DRM at all. And all 3 of their games were best sellers! With zero DRM, install and toss the disc and just play no steam no disc no drm at all.

    43. Re:My interpretation... by kyrio · · Score: 1, Insightful

      So, what's the point you're trying to make now? That you are an idiot who uses a Mac and that's why your first instinct wasn't to remove Steam and reinstall it but to contact support?

    44. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, to all of them. Did you read what I wrote? Where are the hardcore PC games of today? Starcraft 2 (lol)? Skyrim? ARMA? Mass Effect (nope)? Gee, that's a lot of games to play ten years from now.

      And to prove that I spent years playing RTW -- the BI expansion was unbalanced shit, and Europa Barbarorum is what kept the game alive. I actually preferred vanilla RTW MP though.

    45. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      GP isn't the original AC. I am. And you've twisted my argument. Are any FF games being made today that you'll play in 10 years? 20 years? What about other JRPGs or CRPGs? Dragon Age was the largest CRPG effort we've seen recently and that was laughable.

    46. Re:My interpretation... by blackest_k · · Score: 1

      pretty much by definition pirates are not being inconvenienced by digital rights management, as the DRM was removed in the pirated version. So the only people who are inconvenienced are the innocent customers.

    47. Re:My interpretation... by Stan92057 · · Score: 1

      Its always the innocent who pays. Its not MY fault DRM is used by the game industry I pay for everything i use. Its the criminals fault for cracking serial numbers and them giving that out to the masses. Stop sugar coating your reasons taking a product you had no right too. Also your power if you feel your getting screwed in the ass Don't buy their products don't use their products

      --
      Jack of all trades,master of none
    48. Re:My interpretation... by hairyfeet · · Score: 2

      I'd just add that as a repairman and retailer i've seen first hand how the horrible DRM that Ubisoft puts in its games can break the system which puts them in the "Not a fucking chance" column myself. of course the pirate game has NO DRM which means it won't screw your system, yet another case of the pirates offering a BETTER product, not because of price, but because the DRM screws legit customers.

      You see one of the nasty things they don't tell you is NONE of the DRM schemas support each others tech, so if you have Starforce+SecuROM, or SecuROM+Safedisc? Conflict city here you come. Add to that that only recently has the DRM that Ubisoft and other use added support for X64 (and IMHO shoddily at that) and the fact their previous DRM doesn't go "Oh wait, this is a 64bit OS, I probably shouldn't try placing kernel hooks" and will instead happily try to jam 32bit kernel hooks into a 64bit kernel.....I'm sure you can see where the nasty is gonna come from. Oh and the uninstaller DOES NOT WORK ON X64! so the only way to remove it is to dual boot into another version of Windows and remove the crap, well its not fun. Oh and if you end up with Safedisc+SecuROM you can end up with a nasty conflict where both fight over the DVD drive and throw it into PIO mode, thus burning up the drive if you don't catch it.

      So to quote Mr Garrison "You go to hell Ubisoft, you go to hell and you die!" because I will NEVER buy a single one of your products as long as you screw us over, nor will I pirate them. I ONLY pirate games where I have bought the game but don't wish to expose my system to the DRM, like Bioshock II and that POS GFWL, but that would mean giving you a dollar which I'll be damned first. i don't mind DRM that is up front, is fair and is easy to remove like Steam, but your limited installs and going out of your way to pick the nastiest DRM means I wouldn't take you entire catalog if a $1000 hooker brought it on a silver platter. I can live without ever playing Assassins Creed, it isn't like there aren't a bazillion other games I could buy instead.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    49. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The PS3 and 360 are both easily capable of running pirated games. Online play is lost by using one of these hacked consoles, but it's certainly no longer a "secure platform".

    50. Re:My interpretation... by AngryDeuce · · Score: 1

      Are any FF games being made today that you'll play in 10 years? 20 years? What about other JRPGs or CRPGs?

      How the hell do I know what I'm going to be doing 10 years from now? I don't own a time machine. For all we know the world cold be a post-apocalyptic wasteland a year from now and we could all be playing Fallout 3 in real life!!

      I know there are a lot of shitty games out there today, but they're not all shitty. I don't play everything that came out back in 1991, either; there were many, many shitty NES and SNES games, too.

      If I'm not playing any games from the current console generation in 10 years, it will be because they locked us out of all of them with DRM and the other ridiculous bullshit they use to try and fight an unwinnable war against piracy, not because the games themselves were necessarily all bad, and honestly, I don't believe there is any DRM or other content protection scheme that can't or won't be broken later. The only way they're going to have total, 100% control of their I.P. is if they lock the only copies they have in a vault and never release them. Otherwise, it's just a matter of time...

    51. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a JRPG fan who only owns Nintendo consoles (as mentioned in this thread, PS2 emulators are getting good enough that I will probably play some PS2 RPGs that I missed soon), my selection is extremely limited (I became a fan when Nintendo was actually good for JRPGs in the SNES days). That said Arc Rise Fantasia is pretty good and Xenoblade Chronicles is getting very good reviews. I find it hard to believe the JRPG selection on other consoles is actually worse than on the Wii.

    52. Re:My interpretation... by kermidge · · Score: 1

      "It's ridiculous to consider anyone playing the same game in 10 or 20 years."

            Depends on the game, and the gamer, I suppose.

            Silent Hunter IV holds my interest. I played Civ IV from when it came out up to when I bought Civ V - and still play Rhye's and Fall from time to time. When I get Darek's Gemulator set up again in an XP or '98 virtual machine, I will play Empire (the 2.01c or d version for the ST having by far the best maps and map editor, IMO) again. The Monkey Island stuff is fun, not just for me but for my friends' children as well. That's just for starters. Dungeon Master, Sim City, Balance of Power, King's Quest....

            As for Ubisoft, I've looked askance at their DRM shenanigans for a while, and have little to no interest in most of their games. Yet I think SH IV is bar none the finest sub sim ever made (the Steam version works fine under Crossover Games) - with no discredit to other good ones, most of which I've played.

    53. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Action Half Life (a Half Life Mod) came out [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_Half-Life] 12 years ago. I play it online every week.

      I also play the crap out of Bionic Commando [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bionic_Commando_(Nintendo_Entertainment_System)] and that came out 23 years ago.

      Yup, noone plays old games!

    54. Re:My interpretation... by Forever+Wondering · · Score: 1

      And because it's so offensive, I didn't limit the boycott to not just buying the games on the PC. I skipped the games across all platforms. No Assassin's Creed for me? It's a bit of a pity, but I'll live. I mean, really, I'm not the kind of gamer it's a fantastic idea to be upsetting. I buy 30+ games per year (as you can see from the end-of-year roundups I do in my journal).

      Ditto. I buy fewer games (even a few Myst* in the past), never pirated any, but I will _never_ buy (or play) a Ubisoft game ever again as long as I live. Because of articles about Ubisoft's rabid approach to DRM, and their smug, self-validating attitude that if their PC sales are down, it must be because of piracy.

      No, Ubisoft, it's because of the boycott (of which I'm another proud member) ...

      --
      Like a good neighbor, fsck is there ...
    55. Re:My interpretation... by Jarik_Tentsu · · Score: 1

      Or the fact that games like Counter Strike 1.6 or Starcraft: Brood War still have some of the biggest professional leagues in history despite sequels being out.

      Money is still being poured into those leagues.

    56. Re:My interpretation... by cicuz · · Score: 1

      Worms Armageddon FTW!

    57. Re:My interpretation... by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      And that is the problem... Valve makes a killing on renting out Stream because it's the least terrible DRM out there. Ubi and EA are PUBLISHERS that don't want to give the keys to somebody else. Ironically, THEY don't want to RENT IP from somebody else either! Even if it would solve their problem.

    58. Re:My interpretation... by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      I asked a few people what "SNES" stood for or what "ROM emulator" meant,

      I don't know what a "ROM emulator" means either. Are you emulating the bytes are something?

    59. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bought 1st Assasins Creed and was looking forward to get the second one, but after I read about its DRM, I decided against it. There are more good games out there than I have time to play, so skipping some of them is not an issue.

      I actually hope that Ubisoft continues their extremely invasive DRM tactics, so that in the end their failure as a company could be clealy attributed to it.

    60. Re:My interpretation... by luther349 · · Score: 1

      its just there hot button when there inverters go wtf why didn't this awesome game didnt sell. as for the pirate copy's i just made it a point not to play there games anymore. sucks to being i liked them but until they get there heads out of there asses they will not get my money.

    61. Re:My interpretation... by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      It's ridiculous to consider anyone playing the same game in 10 or 20 years.

      You mean like Quake III (1999) or Star Craft (1998)? Both are *very* popular games at LAN parties, not to mention all the derivatives of Quake 3 out there.

    62. Re:My interpretation... by ewanm89 · · Score: 1

      You know all the copy protection and DRM in oblivion, fallout 3, fallout: new vegas and skyrim is just the launcher and config editor don't you? If you don't want the steam achievements and such one can just launch the actual game exe out of the directory. Of course, it doesn't get pirated much, see the valve story in reply..

    63. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    64. Re:My interpretation... by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html

      when i first read it i thought stallmen was a nut but as i watch technology progress i see more and more that he is right, while i still believe that propriatary software is not a mortal sin, but more and more he seems right. some day we are all going to look back and have to grudgingly admit he was right.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    65. Re:My interpretation... by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      Yeah, my gaming experience probably mirrors yours quite well. The last new game I bought was something like 7 years ago. Decent non-FPS games are almost non-existent anymore. Interestingly enough, I actually use the Pirate Bay website to check what sorts of games are popular to see if anything jumps out that may be worth buying. As the years have passed, the list is dominated increasingly by the same game with updated models and occasionally a slightly tweaked or rebuilt with no real purpose (all-new! revolutionary!) engine.

    66. Re:My interpretation... by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Why would you emulate a PS2 when you can just buy one new at your local enormo-mart that plays ALL PS2 games and PSone games absolutely perfectly (not just some), and comes with a built in network adapter.

    67. Re:My interpretation... by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      What? You never got a PSone for all the PSone JRPG's? Jeebus, everyone knows that for JRPG's you also want a PSone/PS2 and PSP, because all the newer games are one those (plus a few PS3 titles), and that those releases seriously outnumber the pitiful few JRPG's that were brought over for the NES/SNES. Remember, it was a PSone game, Final Fantasy VII, that truly popularized JPRG's in the West.If you were smart you'd have picked up a CECHA/CECHB/CECHE model PS3 (those models include PS2 compatibility) ages ago.

    68. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Idiot. You know that while a very small percentage of people will play a few very classic games the vast majority of games get less than 5 hrs of playtime a year within 3 or 4 years of release.

    69. Re:My interpretation... by WhoBeDaPlaya · · Score: 1

      You're lucky you posted this as an AC due to how absolutely asinine it is. I imagine most of us have a backlog of games to play, despite our best efforts to the contrary. This also assumes that one does not revisit an older game simply for nostalgia. I have replayed Fallout, Fallout 2, Diablo 2 (with the highres mod), Morrowind, Death Rally, Populous 2 and many more in the last few years.

    70. Re:My interpretation... by thejynxed · · Score: 1

      Ubisoft games were rather well-known for burning up drives even earlier than that, by using Starforce. I refused to purchase any more Ubisoft games after Starforce 3 destroyed a brand new DVD burner I had just installed. The stupid DRM was programmed to attempt to hook itself into the firmware of the drive, and disable the ability to burn discs. This essentially bricked the things.

      --
      @Mindless Drivel: 100% of Twitter posts ever Tweeted.
    71. Re:My interpretation... by makomk · · Score: 1

      Second-hand PS2s seem to be a bit tricky to buy these days, actually.

    72. Re:My interpretation... by Waccoon · · Score: 1

      Pff... sometimes they don't even want to sell you the game, let alone try it!

      Take the Playstation Store, for example. Aside from having almost no demos, for the longest time they didn't show screenshots, game footage, trailers, or even helpful descriptions. Hell, to this day they don't even tell you the download size until you've already opted to download it. Do they expect me to drop out of the PS Store, fire up their shitty web browser, and do all the research myself on fan sites and YouTube? WTF?

      Apparently Sony got the message, and now the Store graciously... uh, lets you watch trailers... that have buffering issues... for some games.

      No surprise that I've bought almost no games from the Store. Hey, those screenshots are copyrighted! We can't let you have them for free!

      Morons.

    73. Re:My interpretation... by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      1. Far better graphics (1080p at 6x anti-aliasing on my machine without a hitch)
      2. Save states (save anywhere within the game)
      3. Far superior load speeds.

      PS1 games have had a functional emulator that has same advantages for ages.

    74. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quake III (1999)

      Twitch FPS. It's dead, Jim. I remember RuneQuake and Q1:TF quite fondly thank you.

      Star Craft (1998)?

      MM strategy. It's dead. Or well, it would be if not for Blizzard. SC2 is arguably going to kill the genre anyway.

    75. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You idiots are deliberately (ignorantly?) leaving out the end quotation in which I qualified my previous statement:

      Only a small selection of games have been good enough to warrant that kind of long-term fanbase, and those types of games aren't made anymore -- they were designed for hardcore PC gamers. Counterstrike, UT2004, Tribes, OFP, and BG2 for example. It's rare to find non-simplified games these days.

      I wrote that post in response to:

      Have fun in 20 years in your DRM future, when everything is under lock and key.

      Saying that it won't matter because there won't be any new games worth playing.

    76. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see. So do I. But most people do not. I prefaced your objection with my original comment. Normal gamers (ie the 95%) reject old games, even two year old games, just like they scoff at black&white movies and Jazz music. It's their loss, but the attitude itself harms everyone. In ten years there won't be nearly enough people to raise awareness about locked-out games.

    77. Re:My interpretation... by TangoMargarine · · Score: 1

      the same game with updated models and occasionally a slightly tweaked or rebuilt with no real purpose (all-new! revolutionary!) engine.

      i.e. Modern Warfare XXVIII?

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    78. Re:My interpretation... by Forty+Two+Tenfold · · Score: 1
      20 years? Easily.

      http://www.digger.org/

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_Jones_and_the_Fate_of_Atlantis (http://store.steampowered.com/app/6010)

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Control_II

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jagged_Alliance_2

      • http://store.steampowered.com/app/1620/?snr=1_5_9__13
      • http://www.ja-galaxy-forum.com/board/ubbthreads.php?ubb=cfrm&c=11)
      --
      Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
    79. Re:My interpretation... by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      I didn't say second hand did I, because you can still buy them NEW at many retailers.

      http://www.walmart.com/ip/PlayStation-2-Black/10250554

    80. Re:My interpretation... by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Far better graphics (1080p at 6x anti-aliasing on my machine without a hitch)

      That's not "really" better graphics, just upscaling and "smoothing", you can get the same effect from a CECHA/CECHB/CECHE model PS3. Besides, most PS2 games are 4:3 and wouldn't really be 1080p anyway, unless you stretched the image to fit your widescreen.

      Besides, no emulator can play the vast number of PS2 games perfectly, the beast is difficult to properly emulate. I still think you'd be better off getting that PS2, hooking it up with component cables and letting your TV handle the upscaling.

    81. Re:My interpretation... by WiiVault · · Score: 1

      Were you born an asshole or did you hone the skill through practice?

    82. Re:My interpretation... by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      Take a look at Urban Terror. Originally a Q3 mode, then based on ioquake3, the next version will be completely stand-alone. Quake3-like gameplay with ledge climbing, wall-jumping and reloads.

    83. Re:My interpretation... by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      While partially true, it's not fully true. You have a great point with wide screen (I crop to 4:3 on my monitor), but I still DO get 1080p vertically. Which was the claim. Also, actual rendering is done properly in high resolution. No jaggies of any kind anywhere. Of course you see textures being for what they really are - smudgy pieces of crap. But it still looks worlds better because you do render at higher resolution rather then rendering at normal and then upscaling (as far as I know), which means that there is no "laddering" anywhere as there would with upscale.

    84. Re:My interpretation... by Luckyo · · Score: 1

      And editor ate the rest of the message for some reason:

      Advantages are somewhat comparable to more general "PC vs console" argument. I get a bit more bugs, but better graphics, better saving system and better loading speeds.

      Number of games supported at the moment is big enough to last me several years, and encompasses most of the popular games in existence. Best part is, the emulator is done by enthusiasts who instead of focusing only on big time games, focus on games they themselves and those who support them like to play, meaning quite a few relatively small budget titles are also supported properly.

    85. Re:My interpretation... by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Nice to see I'm not the only one who got burnt. BTW didn't you just love their little "challenge" where to "prove" their DRM didn't burn drives you had to fly to Russia or some other middle of nowhere place on your own dime and have it burn a drive in conditions that would NEVER happen IRL, such as a perfectly clean machine with ONLY a single Ubisoft program installed?

      I saw enough bricked drives I actually started telling folks "don't buy Ubisoft games unless you want to throw away your burners' because that damned starforce bricked drives like mad! Didn't know it was trying to hack the firmware though, just figured it was throwing the drives into PIO mode like SecuROM+Safedisc does. Every time a customer comes in and says 'My burner only works REAL slow and is throwing errors" I know exactly the cause, its SecuROM+Safedisc on the same system. POS DRM garbage code.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    86. Re:My interpretation... by Nemesisghost · · Score: 1

      Previews that won't let you watch the DVD you just bought until you devote those 3 minutes of your life to watching the trailer of a movie you don't give a fuck about to watch the one you went out and bought?

      DVDs/BluRays already do this. I can't tell you the number of times I've started a movie I bought, only to have the previews tagged with the same non-skippable tag that the piracy warning has.

    87. Re:My interpretation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the 360, while easily hackable, does carry a very high risk of getting an XBL ban.

      In all honesty, all the people I know with modded 360's don't connect them to Xbox Live. Many of them actually have two consoles: the one they bought originally that got the RRoD or disc tray errors that, due to being out of warranty anyway, they had repaired and modded at the same time...and the regular one they had to buy to replace it with so they could play on XBL.

      Not speaking for everyone, obviously, but it seems silly to even bother trying to play a modded 360 on XBL. Everyone I know that's tried had their accounts banned pretty quickly years ago, hence nobody even really tried anymore. In my experiences, anyway.

      Mines been modded for 5 years and I play on XBL all day everyday.

    88. Re:My interpretation... by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Eventually, as has always happened in the past (though I dearly hope it doesn't); Steam will go out of business. What happens at that point? 90% of the time, you lose all access to the games you paid for. If that is just fine in your book, that is your choice, but many people have been burned too many times by this problem with DRM.

      PS: yes I am aware of Valve's promise to unlock the DRM if they ever stop offering the Steam service, but that promise has been broken in the past by other companies we trusted.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    89. Re:My interpretation... by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Hell, Starcraft 1 was still played heavily all over the world until 2 came out, and that is from 1998.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/StarCraft

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    90. Re:My interpretation... by kyrio · · Score: 1

      Were you born a failure at life? Yes, you were.

  4. Pirates by Tomato42 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Any chance for statistics backing the 95% number? How many of those pirates actually played the game for more than an hour?

    Just be honest and say that the console players will put up with worse games and more expensive games.

    1. Re:Pirates by TheCarp · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Lol so true in so many ways. Though, lately, I get all my games via Steam because either my wife or I see a game package for sale and it goes something like this:
      "Baby they have the entire X Series for $15, I am getting it"
      "Oooh get it for me too"
      "ok"

      The last game I "pirated" was one that I had purchased a copy of, but used some silly DRM and.... lo and behold... the company went out of business. Luckily someone released a DRM-free full version for download (JFK Reloaded btw).

      I think thats part of it right there...I can afford games. So I buy them usually. Wasn't there a study a while back that found.... people who can afford to buy things do, and only people who can't really afford them pirate? Hmmm... so that 95%, who as you say probably only play for an hour (I think thats true of most players with most games...theres tons of games I played for a short time and never returned to)? Most of them probably couldn't afford to buy lots of games anyway....

      so thats 95% loss of.... um... what? The vast majority of them were never going to buy it in the first place.

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    2. Re:Pirates by AngryDeuce · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Just be honest and say that the console players will put up with worse games and more expensive games.

      It makes sense if you think about it. I mean, how many parents go out and buy console games for their kids without really knowing a damn thing about the game itself? I know when I was a kid back in the NES and SNES eras I used to get shitty games all the time; the givers meant well, and I was always gracious, but obviously all they had to go on for a gift for me was "He has a Super Nintendo, therefore, any game is a good gift."

      It stands to reason that a ton of parents do the same for their kids with the Xbox 360 today. Plus, most of the places I've been in that sell games have had either clueless employees or people that will tell you a piece of crap isn't a piece of crap just to get it out of their inventory.

    3. Re:Pirates by dskzero · · Score: 1

      Heh, didn't think of it that way. Another nail!

      --
      Oblivion Awaits
    4. Re:Pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think we can be sure that the number 95% is wrong. Their user base should then be 20 times larger than the amount of sold copies. If that was true, Splinter Cell would have a user base of 38,000,000 users and Assassins Creed 2 close to 200,000,000 users.

    5. Re:Pirates by JAlexoi · · Score: 2

      I'm more interested how many of them actually own their games and downloaded the cracked version just to escape the horrid DRM...

    6. Re:Pirates by houstonbofh · · Score: 1

      Or, how many of those 95% actually bought the game, but also downloaded the crack to keep the draconian DRM from hosing the computer? Actually, I am surprised that 5% didn't...

    7. Re:Pirates by AdamJS · · Score: 5, Informative

      I had to crack almost every Splinter Cell game because their DRM measures essentially "locked" my disc drives entirely when installed, regardless of whether the game was running or not. On my PCs and laptops.

      And this was AN INTENDED EFFECT.
      These guys are off their rockers. They make Capcom's business decisions look wise.

    8. Re:Pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's all my fault, I was mocking too loud and mentioned in the wrong place that I re-filled /dev/zero and /dev/one entirely with the bits from pirated games, music and movies. Especially Ubisoft's games.

      They took me seriously.

      I am the 99%

    9. Re:Pirates by MurukeshM · · Score: 1

      It was the other way around for me. I downloaded a pirated version of AC (the first one), and tried playing it. For some reason, it would crash almost immediately after starting, unless I played during the day. I figured out that it had something to do with my LAN connection (the campus LAN from my room dies outside the hostel during working hours). So I downloaded another version, then I purchased the original, played it with CD in the drive and all. No luck. I dunno how they managed to do it, but a game they released before their strict DRMs came in to force actually had the best luck stopping me fro playing the pirated version.

    10. Re:Pirates by Belgaren · · Score: 1

      I'm more interested how many of them actually own their games and downloaded the cracked version just to escape the horrid DRM...

      As an example, I had to get a crack for Bioshock and Fallout III. I spent over a week on Bioshock going back and forth between CS agents until I finally said "screw it," and got a crack. The solution I was given when the same thing happened in Fallout III was to "upgrade" some parts of my system to something the DRM wouldn't choke on or go pound sand, so I got a crack for it too.

      In both cases the games still ran off of the CD/DVD, the only thing that was different was the DRM was bypassed. It sucks that I've missed out on some releases since then but I've started checking up on what releases have what types of DRM before I buy and I've stopped buying games with bad DRM.

    11. Re:Pirates by Rogerborg · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Own" the game? No, no, no, you own the media. At best, you have some sort of vague and revocable promise to not get sued for making copies of it in your hard drive and RAM.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    12. Re:Pirates by Xest · · Score: 2, Informative

      Okay, I know posting anything that sounds even remotely negative about PC gaming is very taboo here, but I'd rather post and be realistic than watch Slashdot continue it's circle jerk into a pit of self-reassuring ignorance.

      I doubt for a second that he meant the 95% figure literally, but simply meant that a high proportion of PC players pirate the game.

      It's nothing whatsoever to do with console players putting up with worse games, that's one of the most blatant demonstrations of jealous bitterness I've seen here.

      The fact is there's some truth in Ubisoft's stance and whilst I have little sympathy for them as a company because of their misguided DRM attempts that doesn't mean they are wrong.

      The fact remains that PC game sales are lower, see here for example with 2 major releases listed for the week ending 12th November:

      http://www.vgchartz.com/weekly.php

      We have, for MW3:
      X360: 6.6 million
      PS3: 4.7 million
      PC: 0.3 million

      Okay, how about something that's always been designed more as a PC game, and IMHO plays better on a PC and reaps the advantages of mods where consoles can't - Skyrim?:
      X360: 2 million
      PS3: 0.9 million
      PC: 0.5 million

      These figures are quite depressing for the PC, perhaps the biggest selling PC release in the last few years (decade?) Starcraft 2 shifted 3 million in it's first month. Very respectable for presumably the highest selling one off it still doesn't really come close to say, the Call of Duty series in the 360 which breaks 5 mill in a week (not a month like SC2) each year for the past few years despite the game IMO having gone downhill.

      It's pretty well established then that the PC market just doesn't shift as many units as the console market does, it just can't compete in this respect, but there are other factors too - PC gamers are used to paying only £29.99 at most in the UK market for games, versus £39.99 for console games, so not only does the PC face lower sales figures, but lower sales profit also.

      The problem is made worse by the fact the PC is simply more expensive to develop for and support, because of the unfortunate situation of having a massive set of hardware and software combinations to deal with many of which can result in sometimes show stopping bugs if not resolved, and, to further maximise sales, where a larger set of configuration settings is needed, and in some cases a large set of content to support these varying configurations giving varying levels of performance each person's system provides.

      The net result is that there's really questionable benefit to supporting the PC platform, particularly when the time spent to support the PC would probably better spent making DLC for a console release in terms of profit, and whilst you may well want companies to release for the PC anyway, they're not charities, they're businesses, and they'll do whatever maximises their profits. That often means not supporting the PC.

      But it's not all doom and gloom for the PC, I think it's somewhat beneficial, the last few years has seen a massive boom in really really good indie games on the PC because large companies abandoning the platform for higher profit console platforms has left that hole open for indies to compete. There are still areas where PCs are king too - games where decent worthwhile mods can be made, and MMOs - whilst there have been attempts, consoles are next to useless for both of these things.

      I know some people will argue with me and say "Well, Steam doesn't release their stats" and that sort of argument, but it doesn't matter- the reality is that these companies have deemed developing for PCs to be not financially worthwhile however you try and spin it, and getting mad at them wont help.

      Personally? I just enjoy gaming, so prefer to be pragmatic and have a gaming PC as well as an XBox 360 so that I can enjoy the best of both worlds. I can enjoy console only releases and some pretty fucking great ind

    13. Re:Pirates by gyaku_zuki · · Score: 1

      95% is utter trash of a number. It's just not realistic - do the maths and work out how many people that implies pirated the game...

      Meanwhile, services such as OnLive, Steam etc continue to rake in subscribers by offering DRM mechanisms that are inoffensive, and by locking you out of their servers if you are cracked. If you can't even be bothered, Ubisoft, to try to think of an alternative, then take your poor quality game and put it onto an Xbox or PS3. All you do is shrink your market - I mean:

      Not releasing a game on PC = Zero sales on PC
      Releasing a game on PC and having even 95% piracy = Greater than zero sales on PC

      I mean sure, there's a chance that the existence of a free or paid PC version might reduce your console sales a little, but not much. The experience of pirating PC games is generally pretty terrible - one most people avoid after trying a few desperate cracks and them failing or requiring too much effort to get going. Laziness will win, every time.

    14. Re:Pirates by Creepy · · Score: 1

      That is what you call "statistics," or more specifically, bullshit numbers pulled out of their ass to make them look worse than they are. The worst piracy number I have ever heard of was a little over 90%, and that was from an indie game with no protection. In the United States or most of western Europe there is no way they can back up that number, and that will be where 99% of their profit will be made anyway. Skip translating to Chinese, Armenian, and other high piracy languages and problem solved (if they play a pirated version, no big deal - no investment was made to cater to them).

    15. Re:Pirates by dyingtolive · · Score: 2
      Actually, Skyrim's UI suffers from that same "we designed it for a console controller rather than a sane HID" that seems to plague damn near all games nowadays. If I realized that Bethesda was going to follow suit, I probably would have bought the Xbox version myself.

      I agree with what you're saying for the most part, except for this:

      I know some people will argue with me and say "Well, Steam doesn't release their stats" and that sort of argument, but it doesn't matter- the reality is that these companies have deemed developing for PCs to be not financially worthwhile however you try and spin it, and getting mad at them wont help.

      You start off very well by comparing numbers as if they mean something, and then when you admit that we don't know Steam's numbers, you try to state that the numbers don't mean anything, because of the bottom line.

      At any rate, I agree with your end result. The "gap" in the market that's allowed indie devs to step in an innovate has been the diamond in the rough for the PC gaming industry. I mean, that's all I ever wanted. You keep your fancy shaders, your ability to customize any last facet of your character's face and eye color (which doesn't matter in a first person, single player game), and your super realistic shadows, and give me a good and interesting game, not a pretty tech demo. This is the reason why I keep going back to play stuff like Ultima 7 and Planescape: Torment.

      --
      Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
    16. Re:Pirates by Raenex · · Score: 1

      Starcraft 2 shifted 3 million

      What is it with people using words like this instead of sold? Is it just too mundane? Are the marketing droids trying to sound smart again, and it's getting picked up by the populace?

    17. Re:Pirates by aztracker1 · · Score: 1

      Most PC games target Direct-X, and that alone alleviates a lot of the platform disparity. MS has also made the tooling for PC vs. XBox360 development very similar. So the additional cost is very minimal, and with online distribution channels like Steam, the profit margin is very high... Though there is a lot of merit to your arguments, a few of the specifics are a bit off.

      --
      Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
    18. Re:Pirates by Jibekn · · Score: 2

      That's slowly phasing out, as the generation that got shit-tastic games bought for them, is now buying games for their kids. With us being gamers ourselves, we know what to look for, this is in fact a possible major contributing factor to the decline of (shitty) game sales.

      Soon all parents will be ex-gamers, or at least their friends would be saturated enough with gamers so when they ask "What xbox3k game should I get little billy?" they're going to get a very accurate answer, instead of getting "Jack Nicholson Golf on NES" as an answer.

    19. Re:Pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that site counting digital downloads? If they aren't that is why the PC numbers are so much lower MW3 and Skyrim can both be purchased through Steam.

    20. Re:Pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I know some people will argue with me and say "Well, Steam doesn't release their stats" and that sort of argument, but it doesn't matter- the reality is that these companies have deemed developing for PCs to be not financially worthwhile however you try and spin it, and getting mad at them wont help.

      Why are you quoting vgchartz when you already know yourself that their stats are completely wrong for the PC platform? I would love to see the real numbers across all platforms, but I reached the conclusion a long time ago that vgchartz is not the source for that.

      As for Ubisoft leaving the PC platform, I could not care less. I still want my money back from the last game I bought from them.

    21. Re:Pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I believe the statistics you got are wrong. I saw screenshots of 250,000+ users on steam online playing Skyrim. I can't believe that only twice as many people bought it. Sure the stats are from almost 2 weeks ago but that was the time the game was released only a day before it but that should be the time when most players are also playing it. My guess is that those are retail numbers which are always much lower due to a lot of PC gamers buying the games at online download services instead of at a store.

    22. Re:Pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Sophisticated gamers do not play games using only their thumbs.

    23. Re:Pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Except Skyrim probably sold more than 3 million on Steam alone. But we don't have digital sales data, all your post shows is that brick and mortar PC game stores are dying.

    24. Re:Pirates by Jibekn · · Score: 5, Informative

      Those numbers you posted do not include digital sales. I have yet to find a sales stats site that did not exclude digital sales. The 3.4 million number is ONLY retail sales.

    25. Re:Pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      back when I was running windows, i was a pirate of gaming software. If i played the game for more than an hour or two, I would buy it. But I didnt buy many games because most of them sucked.

    26. Re:Pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      VGChartz says "at retail". Does that mean that Steam is not included in the tally for PCs? That'd make a massive difference in the number.

    27. Re:Pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you have $900 worth of GPU why the fuck would you want to buy a console port?

      Call me when the numbers for BF3 come out for PC vs. 360.

      CAPTCHA: achieved

    28. Re:Pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Uh, just where did you get the sales stats for Skyrim from? Especially since Valve don't release sales figures, and the publishers are happy not to discuss it. That goes for Modern Warfare 3 too.

    29. Re:Pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Skyrim is not designed for PC. Its a pure console game port just like every other FPS made today. The UI is awful for PCs, and mouse interaction seems to have been an afterthought. There are still issues with mouse picking menu items for example. Low polygon models, low resolution textures, everything is optimized for consoles. Not to mention changes in gameplay. Key layout that limits you to as many buttons as a controller has, rather than being able to use the entire keyboard. I could go on. Its really annoying.

      Its a trend that I first noticed with Halo, and has kneecapped many games that could've been brilliant since.

    30. Re:Pirates by Bucky24 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Just playing devil's advocate here:
      If they do release the game, and finish it (since from TFS it sounds like they just abandoned the project), they would have paid extra to get it finished, only to have it pirated. Sure, if they've already done the game, it's ridiculous not to release it for this reason, but if it's not finished yet I could see them saying "well it's only going to get pirated anyway, and we probably won't recoup what we've spent, might as well not spend any more"

      --
      All the world's a CPU, and all the men and women merely AI agents
    31. Re:Pirates by icebraining · · Score: 1

      Better that than the widespread abuse of 'price point'. Apparently simply 'price' wasn't good enough.

      (Note: there is in fact something called a price point, but it's not what most people think it is)

    32. Re:Pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have no doubt that on multi-platform games PC sales dwarf those of consoles. However the numbers you provide are entirely useless as all that is tracked are sales from traditional B&M stores, the majority of PC games are purchased online from steam, origin, gog etc. Valve for example has never ever released public sales figures for any games available on Steam.

    33. Re:Pirates by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      I mean sure, there's a chance that the existence of a free or paid PC version might reduce your console sales a little, but not much. The experience of pirating PC games is generally pretty terrible - one most people avoid after trying a few desperate cracks and them failing or requiring too much effort to get going.

      How are these people able to work a computer without completely destroying it?

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    34. Re:Pirates by shentino · · Score: 1

      Yes indeed.

      If you're going to measure lost sales, try measuring how much popcorn the pirates actually ate after stealing it from the concessions stand

      The only way pirates could be blamed for lost sales above and beyond their own missed purchase is if they are sharing it.

    35. Re:Pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Starcraft 2 shifted 3 million

      What is it with people using words like this instead of sold? Is it just too mundane? Are the marketing droids trying to sound smart again, and it's getting picked up by the populace?

      Because sold implies the buyer now owns it, rather than just having a licence to use the product. Shifted is a deliberately vague term.

    36. Re:Pirates by shentino · · Score: 1

      Gee, I wonder why they put up with crap games in the first place.

      Oh right, no competition thanks to the vendors abusing DRM to lock out rivals as well as pirates.

      I bet that if indie game devs got to join the market game quality would go UP and prices might come DOWN.

    37. Re:Pirates by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

      I think in marketing terms there is a difference between 'shifted' and 'sold'. One means the number of unites sold to retailers, and one means the number of unites bought by consumers. I forget which though.

      --
      Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    38. Re:Pirates by blahplusplus · · Score: 1, Insightful

      VGchartz is not a respectable source for numbers so your argument is bullshit. Your numbers for skyrim are way off base as well.

    39. Re:Pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Something about your numbers that should be noted is that they are for retail sales. To my understanding sales numbers for download purchases are not reflected in that. For quite a while now retail sales of PC games have been declining, while download sales have been increasing significantly. However, as numbers for download sales often aren't released we tend to only be given the very skewed picture of things presented by retail sales.

    40. Re:Pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well the most profitable game of all time is PC-only (World of Warcraft) - once MW3 hits 12 million players who pay a monthly subscription then maybe you can make an argument about the potential of consoles vs PC.

      The fact is, PC gaming has a higher bar to entry. Current consoles are cheap and only around the level of performance of a gaming PC from 10 years ago. Of course they're going to have a bigger market share. It must be demoralising to developers though, to work on ever more impressive game engines, to have to disable most of the features, or scale them back to make them run on a PS3 or Xbox - in the case of MW3 they didn't even bother improving the engine, the whole game is mostly just a map pack. Hell, Doom3 on PC still looks better than any current console game.

    41. Re:Pirates by Suddenly_Dead · · Score: 1

      VGChartz' numbers are notoriously unreliable, unsourced, some say fabricated. We don't know how many copies of Skyrim have sold for the PC, and the game has sold 7 Million total by now, not 3.4. Likewise I'm pretty sure Activision hasn't said how many copies MW3 has sold for each individual platform.

    42. Re:Pirates by B1oodAnge1 · · Score: 1

      I know some people will argue with me and say "Well, Steam doesn't release their stats" and that sort of argument, but it doesn't matter

      I know about 4 or 5 people who buy PC games in a physical store, out of the 80+ people I regularly play with. If my group of friends is even slightly representative of PC gamers in general, that makes your sales numbers literally meaningless.

      That said, I have absolutely no problem with shitty developers taking their shitty products to the consoles and leaving us the fuck alone.

      --
      RUGBYRUGBYRUGBY
    43. Re:Pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cool. Now let us add the digitally distributed sales, including Steam to those numbers. Let me know what happens.

      You built your whole argument on a strawman.

    44. Re:Pirates by dskzero · · Score: 1

      I take it you don't understand either the value of Steam as a selling platform, or the fact that developing for the PC is arguably easier than for the PSX3 and just as difficult as for the XBox 260.

      --
      Oblivion Awaits
    45. Re:Pirates by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      He owns a copy of the game. He has a right to use it.

      Anything short of re-distribution should be treated what it really is: exercising your rights as an individual over your own personal property.

      In their rush to protect the rights of corporations, certain parties have neglected the rights of individuals.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    46. Re:Pirates by Vektuz · · Score: 1

      You're incorrect here. The EULA on all these games indicate that what you bought was a hunk of plastic, and you can do what you want with that (including melt it down), but the data that happens to be on it does not belong to you. You've merely been given a revocable license to copy it into ram in order to play it. It sounds unbelievable, I know, but read the small print. This is where we're at in the legal side of games now.

    47. Re:Pirates by guruevi · · Score: 1

      Yet small indie games make over a million dollar in sales in a week (Humble Bundle). Minecraft has just come out of beta and has several millions of dollars in sales. Indie games are being developed in countries with some of the highest employee costs (Sweden, Finland) and they're not only having little media coverage but they're very cheap and still making a profit while companies like EA and Ubisoft that seem to employ the lowest cost programmers they can find are complaining?

      The issue is that all the current big name games that are out and supposedly popular (because they are on console) are very, very bad to play on a PC. BF3, MW3, Skyrim, Duke Nukem are such a bad quality and practically unplayable on PC that honest reviewers say it's not worth buying and then every month you have to buy $10 DLC and every update (such as is the case with BF & CoD franchises) is full price.

      Also, the price for those games is $50+ while Indie games of the same quality (they are out there) are priced at $5 to $15. Yes, Starcraft 2 and WoW are outliers but they really show you what PC gamers want: fun gameplay online and offline and not being nickeled to death with DLC. SC2 has so much free content and users can create their own and they have a good track record with SC1 being supported over a decade after release and WC3 still being played. Even GTA and Saints Row are decent enough examples of fun games that aren't pirated overly much.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    48. Re:Pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really, the only losers in the current situation are the one platform zealots who put petty platform fanboyism over what really matters when it comes to gaming - just having fun playing games.

      There is no fanboyism here. The PC is clearly the superior gaming platform compared to X360 or PS3. There is absolutely nothing that you can do on a console but not on a PC. Every console game, ported properly can play at least as good on a PC as it does on it's home platform.

    49. Re:Pirates by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Okay, how about something that's always been designed more as a PC game, and IMHO plays better on a PC and reaps the advantages of mods where consoles can't - Skyrim?:
      X360: 2 million
      PS3: 0.9 million
      PC: 0.5 million

      Box sales. That does not count *one* digital download.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    50. Re:Pirates by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      They play on the Wii????

    51. Re:Pirates by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      If that is the real reason, then they are horribly lacking in business sense. It isn't like piracy is new. If anything, it is far less common than it ever has been. The claim that they won't finish it because piracy exists inherently includes the claim that they did not know that piracy existed when they started the project, or they thought that 3+ decades into the home video game industry's life, they expected piracy to magically disappear.

      Both of those arguments are simply too stupid to be believable. A claim that they won't start a project might be believable, but claiming that they are abandoning a project that they have already invested money into because of a problem that has only gotten less severe is not.

    52. Re:Pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a Console / PC games developer, who has worked with a number of publishers, I am sure Ubi's comments are based on their analysis of the numbers.

      Their PC games sales no longer cover the cost of creating and supporting a PC platform. The PC may work as a platform for others, with different cost structures / production values, but no longer them. You don't leave a market segment if it is profitable.

      I have watched a game I work on, top the PC torrent charts, yet fail to cover it's costs (including all the exotic hardware support calls form people we knew had not purchased the game). I am not for a moment suggesting that every pirate would have bought the game, but if there is a profit to be made in consoles, and a loss in PC, dropping the PC version to focus on console will create a better game for the customer.

    53. Re:Pirates by ewanm89 · · Score: 1

      Only cause Bethesda want the games for windows tag on the box, to get M$ to do that, they have to make the game playable by an xbox 360 controller plugged into a PC.

    54. Re:Pirates by ewanm89 · · Score: 1

      Not to mention, the tools on PC are cheaper, at the end of the day I can get enough tools for free to make the game. I couldn't commercially sell it with M$'s compilers acquired that way. But there are other compilers I could use there.

    55. Re:Pirates by ewanm89 · · Score: 1

      http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ee417691(v=vs.85).aspx#_1.4 - basically to get the badge on it, microsoft require support if one plugs an xbox 360 controller into the PC to work in the game.

    56. Re:Pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's flat out false. 0% of their customers pirated the game. Lots of people pirated it. Perhaps 20x as many people pirated it as bought it, but all that shows is only 1/20 people who were interested in the game thought that it was worth paying for.

    57. Re:Pirates by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      Yup, every EULA I've ever read (and I've read a lot of them) includes a section where the distributor reserves the right to sever the license agreement, thus nullifying the ability of the user to continue legal use of the software.

    58. Re:Pirates by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      Soon all parents will be ex-gamers

      Why ex-gamers exactly? Is there something about parenthood that prevents you from playing games?

      I am in my 40s and still play computer games on a regular basis. If I had kids I could recommend games going back to the early 80s. Computer games have been around at least since the 70s. The graphics have gotten a lot better though right up until Crysis where they finally hit a ceiling. At this point I guess graphics less good than Crysis are finally considered 'good enough'. Some people might have predicted that at this point gameplay would finally start improving. Unfortunately that didn't happen.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    59. Re:Pirates by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Current consoles are cheap and only around the level of performance of a gaming PC from 10 years ago.

      10 years ago was 2001, that's Geforce 3 era and both the PS3 and Xbox 360 can easily overmatch a GeForce 3! Can't play Skyrim on a GeForce 3 can you? Heck as far as I know Skyrim won't even run on the default Nvidia 6150SE this thing has.

      And CPU wise that was about 1-2GHz era, single core, no match for the PS3 or 360 MIPS wise.

    60. Re:Pirates by Totenglocke · · Score: 1

      I think you meant "Jack Nicklaus" - though Jack Nicholson Golf would be a rather morbid and disturbing game.....

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
    61. Re:Pirates by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I pirated all the Sims 3 packs. My wife bought Sims 3, and has since bought all the expansions. However, we had moved countries, and they country code the expansions so that you can't add the Pets here to the Sims 3 from the US. Why? I don't know. The cracked versions work, but not store-bought (maybe the cracks are all from US discs). So buy then crack. Another case of the companies making it harder on those trying to give them money. The pirated version Just Works, and the one bought in a store does not work unless we re-buy the core game. No other option exists.

    62. Re:Pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Being a new parent, the only thing that prevents me from playing games is that nearly all of the time I would have spent playing games is now spent taking care of this baby. Assuming I did away with all of my other hobbies, I could maybe fit in about three hours per week of gaming during the next couple of years. Seeing as gaming is perhaps the most useless and time consuming of my hobbies, that's the first to go.

      Once this baby turns into a kid that can entertain itself, I might have some free time, but at that point I'll have completely broken free of gaming's grasp and why the hell would I want to go back to it?

    63. Re:Pirates by dyingtolive · · Score: 1

      Huh. Did not know that. Annoying still, but I guess I see the importance in that from their point of view.

      --
      Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
    64. Re:Pirates by Xest · · Score: 1

      Yes, but I covered precisely this point in my post.

      If companies are pulling out of the market regardless because it's not profitable it demonstrates that no matter how many more digital sales there are, they're obviously not enough to make it a platform worthwhile porting to, and that's really my core point regardless of the actual figures.

      It's not like they're avoiding the PC platform out of spite, if there's profit there they'd support it, but there isn't, so they're not, it's really that simple.

    65. Re:Pirates by Xest · · Score: 1

      Thank you for adding the only sane, rational post to the discussion. Every single other response has missed the point with "But VGChartz is WRONG!" or "The PC is still the best" whilst ignoring my core point - that many developers have ditched and are ditching the PC as a platform because of the raw numbers they make in profit.

      The worst part is they miss the sheer contradiction in their own arguments - "Console gaming isn't more profitable, Microsoft and Sony take a cut!" - what? and they think Valve offers their Steam services for free?

      As I mentioned previously that has been entirely missed - the decision to stop supporting the PC for certain titles is entirely down to the net profit and if the net profit is negative or small, then their time is better spent on something where the net profit is high, and a lot of that means working on console DLC or new console titles instead.

      So again, thanks for adding your rational and informed voice to the conversation, it's a shame the zealots are too blinded by their fanboyism to recognise the fallacy of their arguments, and more importantly - miss the fundamental point. Perhaps the worst part is now I've posed the cost question to them - i.e. "Why are developers abandoning the platform if there's worthwhile profit to be made?" I can already predict the responses - "They're not abandoning the platform, the PC has loads of AAA titles getting released for it!", and so we're back to square one - the article itself which shows that's clearly not the case.

      It's a shame we can't have sensible discussion here because the fanboys nowadays are so childish and irrational over the issue but hey, no skin off my back I guess. As I say, I've got both platforms, so when in their ignorance their favourite platform fades away it wont cause me any inconvenience. They're already missing out on countless really good console titles whilst they wait months between the odd good PC title here and there.

    66. Re:Pirates by Xest · · Score: 1

      "You start off very well by comparing numbers as if they mean something, and then when you admit that we don't know Steam's numbers, you try to state that the numbers don't mean anything, because of the bottom line."

      So out of interest, you seem to be implying I'm wrong about it being about the bottom line at the end of the day, what do you propose is the reason for developers skipping the PC as a platform so often when developing AAA titles then?

      Aversion to making a profit?

      Hatred of PC gamers?

      The developers themselves are console platform fanboys even though they do the development on PCs?

      A lot of people have made the implication you have without a rational explanation as to why these companies would avoid the platform if there is as they imply, so much profit to be made by supporting it.

      It's all very well to shoot down an argument, but if you can't give a good reason as to why that argument is wrong and an alternative explanation for the scenario then you might as well believe the earth is 6000 years old, is flat, and that global warming isn't happening.

      If you have a better explanation though, I'd love to hear it - unlike many hear I'm quite open to accepting a new explanation and point of view if it makes sense and is well founded. If you don't have a better more rational explanation though I can only assume I'm right, and as usual, the fanboys are just in a pissy huff about their pet platform being neglected.

      At the end of the day companies like Ubisoft are out to make money - we may not have Steam sales figures, but they know exactly how much money they've made and if it ceases to be worthwhile, they'll cease to do it. All they are basically saying in TFA is "We've reached the point where it's no longer worthwhile, if all the piracy figures were sales figures then it would be worthwhile, but as they're not then it's not worthwhile". I'm not sure what's so wrong about that other than single platform crybabies upset that they're not going to get a new game, even though they claim they "don't want it anyway".

      I don't disagree with your last paragraph, I still think UO was the best MMO to date, and Quake 1 still my favourite all time FPS. I'm also dissapointed that many classic games haven't had worthwhile remakes or new franchises based around that gameplay - from desert strike to syndicate, and magic carpet to cannon fodder, there's a lot of good old game types lost in time but that are still more fun than made modern state of the art games. Gameplay is king for sure.

    67. Re:Pirates by Jibekn · · Score: 1

      But that's not why they're dropping PC, they may be putting on that song and dance. But the whole industry knows, that if you make quality games, the PC market is VERY profitable. Try telling Acti-Blizzard that the PC market is unprofitable and they should pull out. Off the record I bet they mercilessly make fun of Ubi for their business decisions. I know I would.

    68. Re:Pirates by Xest · · Score: 1

      "But that's not why they're dropping PC, they may be putting on that song and dance."

      Okay well you seem to know more about Ubisoft's internal decisions than me then so why are they dropping it if it's not financial? If it's profitable like you say then what is their reason for choosing not to make a profit off that platform?

      "But the whole industry knows, that if you make quality games, the PC market is VERY profitable."

      Do they? So why are the vast majority of platinum selling titles no longer released on PC and only the exceptionally high selling titles like CoD and Skyrim released?

      Activision is a pretty poor example when even most Activision titles aren't even released on the PC nowadays.

    69. Re:Pirates by Jibekn · · Score: 1

      When they make the statement "95% of our customers pirate our games anyway" they lose any and all credibility and sound like a bunch of butt-hurt tweens.

      I pirate Ubi games, 100% of the time because of all the BS that the company has spouted and tried to cram down our throats over the years. And I can promise you, that the seeders never came even close to 20% of their sales, let alone 95%. So yes, when you make a sensationalist claim, people disregard your whole argument, just like I'm disregarding yours for backing them up, might there be some truth to it? Don't know, don't care. If the people at Ubi want to be taken seriously, they can act the part. Until then Im not really listening, nor am I really listening to the people who try and back them up.

    70. Re:Pirates by Xest · · Score: 1

      It's called hyperbole, they weren't saying a cold hard 95% pirate, just that enough do to make it not financially worthwhile supporting the platform.

      When someone says "Hey, that's cool" they don't literally mean it's cold you know.

      But regardless thanks for proving my point for me, you pirate and try and justify it to yourself with some excuse and then complain when they wont release for the PC at all. That was precisely what I suspected was the case here - many people here are only whining because when they don't even develop the game for the PC at all they can no longer pirate it, not that they ever had any intention of buying it.

      So really, you might as well keep on crying, they aren't in the business of making games for you for free which you can pirate.

    71. Re:Pirates by Jibekn · · Score: 1

      Who said I pirated their PC games, or even game on a PC?(I do, but its an assumption) I also have a modded 360, Wii and PS3. So Ubi's move will never effect me, if they release a game I want to play, I will play it, and I wont pay for it.

      Fact of the matter is I'm a single middle class male, with gobs of disposable income. I have no problems spending money on games, the collectors edition of SW:TOR and D3 I have ordered kind of prove that point. My high horse its not an excuse, I truly will not support software companies who treat their customers like garbage, and on the flip side I will buy games that I have no intention of playing just to support the genre (4x turn based, I'm looking at you)

      But in that same vein of thought, if there's a game I want to play, I'm going to play it. If the company(or publisher) wants me to pay for it, they better be consumer friendly, if they're not, I will steal from them and have no feelings of guilt in doing so.

      I vote with my wallet, but I'm not going to go without a good game, I just wont pay for it, if the devs wanted my money, they will pick a publisher that doesn't have a track record of being complete dicks to their customers, and installing borderline criminal software on my PC without permission.

    72. Re:Pirates by Xest · · Score: 1

      "Who said I pirated their PC games, or even game on a PC?"

      Erm, you? -

      "I pirate Ubi games, 100% of the time because of all the BS that the company has spouted and tried to cram down our throats over the years. And I can promise you, that the seeders never came even close to 20% of their sales, let alone 95%."

      The 95% figure was hyperbole related to PC gaming, hence by saying what you said you were admitting you pirate Ubisoft games 100% of the time on the PC.

      "But in that same vein of thought, if there's a game I want to play, I'm going to play it. If the company(or publisher) wants me to pay for it, they better be consumer friendly, if they're not, I will steal from them and have no feelings of guilt in doing so."

      Yes and as I say that's fine, that's your choice.

      What's not fine is that you then cry when they decide to stop producing games for you. If Ubisoft have decided not to produce PC games because people like you pirate them then you have absolutely no right to cry that you can't play their latest games because they decided not to release them on PC.

    73. Re:Pirates by Jibekn · · Score: 1

      Granted(first half) ill admit they were using hyperbole, however its extremely unprofessional to do so, and is not helping their case. Im not crying, I'm calling Ubi idiots, and what they dont realize is piracy is rampant in consoles as well(I personally have 2 Ubi games pirated on my 360, and 0 on my PC). I'de actually guess that piracy is a worse problem for xbox than pc, at least every single pirated PC game you cant play online, on top of that the big XBox titles seem to be on torrent sites a week or more before release.

      If Ubi is finding the PC market unprofitable, its not the pirates, is the business decisions. Plenty of companies who provide quality software, with reasonable DRM are making a truckload of money off PC gaming, and piracy is NOT why Ubi is not among them is my point. So Ubi blaming pirates for backing out of PC gaming, is like me getting mad at a dog for crapping on the floor after I lock him in a room for 24 hours, what did I expect to happen? Ubi made DRM so restrictive and anti-user that the pirate copys work and play better, and on top of that treat their paying customers like garbage on their forums and in emails, what did they expect to happen?

      I truly believe that the GP was correct, Ubi knows that console gamers will put up with more garbage than PC gamers, and they also know most of the software they sell is garbage, doesn't take a physicist to do the math.

  5. An eventual negative return on investment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    At what point do investors realize that digital games and feature films are an excessive risk and stop funding developers and studios?

    1. Re:An eventual negative return on investment by Jibekn · · Score: 3, Interesting

      When they truly become unprofitable, not the pseudo-unprofitable the industries are trying to claim right now. if they're losing money at every turn according their FUD, and have been for years, how exactly are they still around? Oh that's right, they are in fact quite profitable, and will remain so, but the CE* types raking in millions might have to take a pay cut, or worse just not exist in some companies (Indys go go good team) And that my friends is what this is really all about. Fat cats making gobs of cash for doing nothing have their racket threatened, because more and more devs, the creativity behind these awesome games, have realized they can go make a game, distribute it through steam and make a small fortune instead of a 80,000 a year salary and watching all their creativity fill the pockets of useless managers and retail level publishers.

      I for one welcome the death of the retail software industry, long live the digital age.

    2. Re:An eventual negative return on investment by icebraining · · Score: 1

      Feature films? Maybe when they stop having consecutive record profits, year after year.

  6. Piracy blames Ubisoft by AdamJS · · Score: 5, Funny

    For delaying the cracks for better games.
    How's a guy supposed to pirate and play the latest GoodPCGame_X if all of the crackers and scene releases are busy spending their time mocking Ubisoft with pre-release cracks?

    Easily the most terrifying and effective of anti-piracy measures: Flooding the pros with entertaining shit to do.

    1. Re:Piracy blames Ubisoft by houstonbofh · · Score: 1

      Easily the most terrifying and effective of anti-piracy measures: Flooding the pros with entertaining shit to do.

      That was awesome!

  7. AWWWWW by Dunbal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yet somehow in this environment full of pirates, Call of Duty manages to make a billion dollars, Skyrim manages to make over 450 million dollars, etc. Ubisoft is full of shit and their games stopped being good a long time ago. Come to think of it no, SSI was good. But who the hell is Ubisoft? Ahh yes, they wanted to become another EA studio-devouring machine. Well the experiment has failed.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    1. Re:AWWWWW by poity · · Score: 1

      CoD is mainly a multiplayer game that requires authentication, you can pirate the single player experience but that's less than half of the game, and Skyrim is Skyrim, hyped for 3 years on top of the 3 years of Oblivion hype. Should Ubisoft either move into the multiplayer market, or put all their efforts into marketing its single most popular title like Bethesda? Not saying the rest of your post is wrong, but those examples aren't the best.

      --
      your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
    2. Re:AWWWWW by Machtyn · · Score: 1

      I agree. I couldn't figure Ubisoft out. They had some great games in the 90s. But seemed to putter along in the 2000s. But what you said is correct, they were trying to be EA.

    3. Re:AWWWWW by Kjella · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yeah, I think it's pretty clear gamers aren't buying Ubisoft's PC games... I wouldn't either, who knows what crap they'll bundle with their next game. Really, really horrible DRM is a piracy driver, not a sales driver. Most people are lazy and uninformed and will buy that shit the first time, but then you've pissed on all your sales after that. They're just too dense so understand the pool of piss they're in is of their own making.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    4. Re:AWWWWW by AdamJS · · Score: 4, Insightful

      hyped
      The hype came from Oblivion being a good game, TES being a good series and some good and not-totally-lying marketing.

      The example is a great one. Bethesda delivered good game after good game and gave the series a reputation.
      Thus, that allowed greater initial sales. "That:" being "making a good bloody game."

      Of course, there's also the fact that they aren't complete assholes and actually encourage interaction and fostering growth with their PC userbase.

      Which Ubisoft does not do. They hate PC gamers, especially the ones that buy their games; unless they are grossly incompetent, they are actively spiting their paying customers because they know that a given DRM implementation will not do anything but fuck over legitimate consumers.

    5. Re:AWWWWW by Dyinobal · · Score: 1

      Ya you have to consider the fact that years and years after releasing Morrowind the modding community for it is still alive. Oblivion's modding community is also still alive, and the Skyrim modding community is waiting to blow up.

      Hell I own an actual physical disk of Morrowind, but it came up the other day on Steam for like 10 bucks and I still bought it just because steam's install process is much easier and I don't generally like having to dig through my CD collection any time I want to play Morrowind.

    6. Re:AWWWWW by ArsonSmith · · Score: 0

      They're just another greedy business. The only reason they bother making a good game is to bilk you out of your money.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    7. Re:AWWWWW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The hype came from Oblivion being a good game, TES being a good series and some good and not-totally-lying marketing.

      No it didn't; the hype came from two topics: the "zomg epic" trailer, and the millionth-time-repeated-claim that, "Skyrim will fix all the flaws (all!) that made Oblivion a shitty game." Skyrim was essentially praised as the second-coming-of-God even by non-TES fans, long before Skyrim ever came out.

    8. Re:AWWWWW by causality · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They're just another greedy business. The only reason they bother making a good game is to bilk you out of your money.

      To be fair, actually working to earn that money by creating something of value to exchange for it isn't terribly greedy.

      Usually "greed" wants to short-circuit this process and get something for little or nothing, or use anti-competitive tactics, or vendor lock-in to escape competing on merit, or abuse the political system to get laws written in its favor.

      If you think Bethesda honestly created a great game that is worth what they charge and you buy it, they deserve and have earned the money they made.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    9. Re:AWWWWW by nhat11 · · Score: 1

      You do know the Skyrim is now locked to steam now right? CoD is making a killing on the console market.

    10. Re:AWWWWW by Dunbal · · Score: 3, Funny

      You work at Ubisoft or something? OK whatever. The point is OTHER game companies manage to make money - even Paradox Interactive, which is notorious for shipping buggy, unfinished pieces of crap. Ubisoft has simply forgotten what it's all about. The board should pay themselves big fat bonuses and just dissolve the company.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    11. Re:AWWWWW by flimflammer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're absolutely correct, which is why Bethesda is one of the few game companies that openly embraces modding to the extent that they do. Bethesda understands that modding is only a good thing that extends sales far beyond what's considered normal.

    12. Re:AWWWWW by flimflammer · · Score: 1

      If they're willing to work hard to provide me solid entertainment, I don't care that they're in it for the money. They're doing it right compared to a good number of studios piling out shit and hoping for a quick buck.

    13. Re:AWWWWW by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      And in the 1990's they were coasting on the acquisition of Strategic Simulations Inc, and all its franchises. Which they ruined, one by one.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    14. Re:AWWWWW by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      You do know the Skyrim is now locked to steam now right?

      Yes, I have a copy here. And I really don't care about them locking it to steam (it can still be cracked if I wanted to, or if Steam went out of business). Steam allows me to install it on all my computers, so I can still play on my laptop when I travel. What more could I want?

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    15. Re:AWWWWW by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Informative

      If you think Bethesda honestly created a great game that is worth what they charge and you buy it, they deserve and have earned the money they made.

      Yes I do. Skyrim is fun. It's not without its problems, but it's fun and it's beautiful and it's a great pass-time. I bought Silent Hunter 3 from Ubisoft and it was a buggy piece of shit. I bought Silent Hunter 4 hoping for improvement. They made it worse. I tried Silent Hunter 5 without buying it and was convinced I would never give Ubisoft another penny.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    16. Re:AWWWWW by Omestes · · Score: 1

      Your ignoring the fact that the most powerful form of marketing is word of mouth from positive previous experiences. I bought and evangelized Skyrim because every single TES game was awesome, and every single Bethesda game has been well worth the money, despite of the Bethesda bugs. Bethesda is in the same pantheon as Blizzard, where you know you're going to get a damn good game (Blizzard might be passing away though, in a hail of pandas).

      Both of these companies have earned the benefit of the doubt, thanks to their long history of not sucking, and as such I tell my gaming friends about their products.

      Actually these might be the only two (large) studios who still have any of my respect. Blizzard may not, since my faith in them still hinges on Diablo 3 not being a soulless cash grab. But if Bethesda made a game about shrimp feces, I would probably recommend it to all my friends without ever reading a single blurb about it.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    17. Re:AWWWWW by TheRealGrogan · · Score: 1

      I have deliberately refused to buy any game with Ubisoft's name on it, since the Assasin's Creed 2 DRM. Before that, they were a game publisher that I liked. Good titles, decent quality, hassle free etc.

      But they are now on my (long) list of companies that can go ride the baloney pony off into the sunset.

      Look at how many people are saying similar things. It shows that Ubisoft is full of shit... it's not piracy that ruins their business on the PC platform, it's their DRM.

      "95% piracy rate" --- what a crock of shit. I look forward to their pain.

    18. Re:AWWWWW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know what forums or websites you've been reading. The popular opinion on a lot of sites (Reddit, 4chan, etc) is that Oblivion was boring trash ruined by a bad leveling system.

    19. Re:AWWWWW by B1oodAnge1 · · Score: 1

      also Valve.

      --
      RUGBYRUGBYRUGBY
    20. Re:AWWWWW by heinousjay · · Score: 0

      Oh no a few hundred people in known echo chambers spouted out the same opinion? Clearly you have your finger on the pulse of the general public and not some weird-ass self-selected subset.

      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
    21. Re:AWWWWW by Ardyvee · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry to inform you that CoD can be played online with a cracked copy. "Pirates" are not there yet with MW3, and we'll all have to wait until they get there, but they will. Be sure of it. Just look at the alternative to IWNet. Really mindless to use, if you ask me.

      --
      I don't care if I'm wrong. I only care about everyone obtaining something from the discussion.
    22. Re:AWWWWW by Omestes · · Score: 1

      he popular opinion on a lot of sites (Reddit, 4chan, etc) is that Oblivion was boring trash ruined by a bad leveling system.

      Yes, Oblivion didn't compare at all with Morrowind or Daggerfall, but it still was a damn fine game compared to most other western RPGs on the market at the time. I felt the same about (to move past TES) Fallout 3, it was somewhat lackluster to my expectations (Fallout 1 & 2, and even Tactics. Thankfully NV recovered most of my love for the franchise), but it still was a decent game, and much better than pretty much anything else out there. I didn't like Oblivion that much when finally purchased it (after the expansions, and GoTY editions), but I still logged around over 100 hours into it (as opposed to Morrowind's 300+). But playing Skyrim, I find myself looking back at some moments in Oblivion fondly.

      The beautiful thing about the TES series (and Bethesda games in general) is the fact that you can fix pretty much everything you dislike. Not many other companies allow the level of modification Bethesda does, hell, they even embrace it. After the last Skyrim patch, encrypting the executable, which broke LAA patches (why not just allow it to be 64bit? Who knows), one of their folks tweeted the location of the LAA workaround which works on the new exe. I can't really think of my other companies that would do that.

      Also, I don't value the collective opinion of Reddit or (especially) 4chan very highly. Both of them are fringe sites known more for "culture" and "memes" than actual insight or content. I doubt they are at all representative of gamers in general, much less anything approaching my opinions, which are the only ones that actually matter much to me. Oblivion did have a fair amount of hype, at least in my circle of friends. Yes, there was a ton of whinging on the auto-level crap, and the general Bethesda facial deformity problems, but on the whole people I know enjoyed them, enough for me to purchase the full package the second I had a computer that could actually play them (meaning I left Apple-land). That is successful advertising, to me.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    23. Re:AWWWWW by Ardyvee · · Score: 1

      If I recall correctly, Oblivion was really famous (within the online community) by it's bugs. As a matter of fact, the modding community released multiple unofficial patches to fix the problems Bethesda didn't, effectively adding content to the vanilla experience. And while the AI continues to be dumb as ever in Skyrim, the game is, as you say, fun and beautiful.

      --
      I don't care if I'm wrong. I only care about everyone obtaining something from the discussion.
    24. Re:AWWWWW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I doubt that. Read any gaming forum on the web and I think you'll find the same sentiment. A significant amount of Morrowind and Daggerfall fans love to hate on Oblivion. It's not just a luddite appeal either because many of those critics appreciate Skyrim.

    25. Re:AWWWWW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      good point.
      any of these games made more that the entire budget for the 3 lord of the rings movies. thats lots of money in my book.

      the piracy histerya is more like set in a corporate mindframe like "we're not making ultra mega gigantic amouns of profit just mega gigantic"..

    26. Re:AWWWWW by NitroWolf · · Score: 1

      Yet somehow in this environment full of pirates, Call of Duty manages to make a billion dollars, Skyrim manages to make over 450 million dollars, etc. Ubisoft is full of shit and their games stopped being good a long time ago. Come to think of it no, SSI was good. But who the hell is Ubisoft? Ahh yes, they wanted to become another EA studio-devouring machine. Well the experiment has failed.

      This pretty much sums it up.

      I also wanted to point out that Ubisoft is not releasing a PC title because of all the piracy... so in effect, they'd rather get 0% of nothing instead of >0% of something.

      Yeah... that makes sense!

    27. Re:AWWWWW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bought Silent Hunter 3 from Ubisoft and it was a buggy piece of shit. I bought Silent Hunter 4 hoping for improvement. They made it worse. I tried Silent Hunter 5 .

      I feel like you are some kind of masochist.

    28. Re:AWWWWW by CmdrPony · · Score: 1

      I also wanted to point out that Ubisoft is not releasing a PC title because of all the piracy... so in effect, they'd rather get 0% of nothing instead of >0% of something.

      Yeah... that makes sense!

      Well that's not completely true. If the game is only for consoles, then people will buy it for consoles. I know I did with the first Bad Company, GTA IV and other games which didn't have a PC release.

  8. Not piracy... laziness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The "piracy" aspect is pure BS. Ubisoft is just too cheap to want to deal with QA on anything but a console. Yes, there are a lot of CPU/graphics card/motherboard/GPU combinations, but instead of blaming it on "piracy", perhaps they just should have said they only want a nice, closed platform they can write code on, and tack on tons of DLC?

    If Ubisoft leaves the PC market, I'm sure not shedding any tears. There will always be someone who will come in and make reasonably good games. Perhaps another ID.

    1. Re:Not piracy... laziness by antifoidulus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Um, no. This seems to be a common meme on slashdot, but it has very little to do with reality. While the increased number of possible graphics cards/hardware configs of PCs are a problem, the cost of supporting them is dwarfed by the license costs for consoles. Anyone can release a game on Windows/OS X and not pay Microsoft or Apple a dime, but you cannot release a game on a console without giving Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo a cut of your revenue. Long story short companies that don't release games for the PC aren't doing so because they simply don't think it will sell for whatever reasons. If companies thought they could sell as many copies of a game released only on the PC as they could console games you bet they would release more for the PC even if it requires spending a little bit more on doing QA.

    2. Re:Not piracy... laziness by RogueyWon · · Score: 2

      You're not actually wrong as such, but there's a bit more complexity here than your post acknowledges.

      There are indeed licensing costs associated with the consoles. However, these are habitually passed directly on to the consumer. In the UK, for example, the console-manufacturer's slice on a newly released game tends to be £10. This is why a new PC game in the UK will retail for £30, while the same game, released for the consoles in the same week, will be on sale at £40.

      The additional development/testing costs associated with the development of a PC version, however, tend to be borne by the developer directly.

    3. Re:Not piracy... laziness by antifoidulus · · Score: 2

      Well in the US the price of the games are usually the same, but there is a difference that your post helped me to realize, the costs with licensing are based on how many copies you sell, however the extra costs associated with PCs are sunk by the time the game is released, whether it sells well or not.

    4. Re:Not piracy... laziness by AngryDeuce · · Score: 1

      If companies thought they could sell as many copies of a game released only on the PC as they could console games you bet they would release more for the PC even if it requires spending a little bit more on doing QA.

      I think it's more that the companies know that they can't sell ridiculous reskins for $2 a pop to the PC market.

      This is why the major developers love the console market. Also why they're starting to move to the Facebook and mobile game markets. They want to cash in on the millions of people that say "Eh, $2 isn't that much." Next thing you know they've sunk $100 into new buildings for their farm.

    5. Re:Not piracy... laziness by RogueyWon · · Score: 1

      Really? Whenever I'm in the US, PC games always seem to be cheaper than their console equivalents there as well.

      The really interesting thing about the console license fee is what this means for the economics of the console manufacturers. Every copy of a third party game sold is basically "pure" profit for the console manufacturer. The only expenses they've put in are the (trivial) costs of providing the dev-kits early in the console cycle and some (also fairly trivial) certification costs. All of the cost and the risk rests with the third party developer.

      A first-party game gives a bigger cash return on each copy sold to the console developer. This is good and if the game is a mega-success, that's fine. But it's still true that far more games lose money than make them - and all three console developers have had failures as well as successes with first party games over the last few years. By contrast, every third party game released on your platform is "free money", even if the game is a failure that the developer loses money on.

      This is why Sony's gaming division made bucketloads of money on the previous console cycle, particularly in the late-cycle. It's also why despite healthy profits from strong Wii sales early in the cycle, Nintendo's finances are pretty miserable as we go into the late-cycle this time around (while the gaming divisons of MS and Sony are doing pretty well, despite struggling earlier in the cycle). A large installed base is good - but not necessarily just in its own right. It's good if you can leverage it into third party development interest and third party game sales.

      The PC, meanwhile, has nobody who automatically creams off a percentage of every sale made (though there are systems that third party developers can choose of their own volition to use which will, such as Steam or Games for Windows). That's a big advantage for the platform from the third party developer's point of view. The corresponding downside - again from the developer's point of view (from the user's point of view, some of this is upside) - is that the platform also lacks a champion; somebody to promote broader interest in it and enforce and manage technical standards.

    6. Re:Not piracy... laziness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyone can release a game on Windows/OS X and not pay Microsoft or Apple a dime

      Not only that, but nVidia/AMD will actually pay developers who tune games to run on their hardware.

    7. Re:Not piracy... laziness by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

      Well to be fair, Nintendo's problems aren't only game sales, they are also the insanely strong yen which is basically at an all time high. Unlike Sony Nintendo really hasn't done a very good job of spreading it's costs around geographically and thus is still beholden to the strength of the yen much more than Sony is. Also Sony can wait for the yen to drop off or can take it's Euros or dollars and invest them in other divisions, Nintendo being much smaller does not have this luxury.

    8. Re:Not piracy... laziness by RogueyWon · · Score: 1

      The Yen isn't helping - very true. But the fact remains that Nintendo chose a "quick win" strategy for this console generation, while MS and (probably accidentally) Sony went for slower-burn strategies.

      If Nintendo had the Wii-U ready to go for Christmas 2009 they would have been laughing. As it is, they are bowing out of another console gen sort-of looking like the losers, and if the Wii-U doesn't succeed in 2012 (which it probably won't, given the current economic climate) then they're fucked. Probably out of the home-console-hardware game for good.

    9. Re:Not piracy... laziness by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

      I also think that Nintendo either didn't predict, or chose to ignore, the emerging smart phone/social network gaming trends. They basically put all their effort into trying to win the "casual games" market, only to lose that market to iOS, Android, and Facebook, competitors that basically didn't exist when the Wii and DS were first released.

    10. Re:Not piracy... laziness by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      and (probably accidentally) Sony went for slower-burn strategies.

      No accident, Sony actually said so.early on how they believed this console generation would last longer, just like how they said the PS2 would have a 10 year shelf life...which it did. (Damn thing just won't DIE)

  9. Crazy idea, I know... by AngryDeuce · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe you could give people an incentive to actually buy a PC game? First step would be to stop releasing broken-ass console ports to the PC market, I bet that would help sales a lot. Also, get rid of any additional software to run, i.e., Steam and the other ridiculous spyware crap that is bundled with so many PC games today.

    1. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by houstonbofh · · Score: 1

      Maybe you could give people an incentive to actually buy a PC game? First step would be to stop releasing broken-ass console ports to the PC market, I bet that would help sales a lot. Also, get rid of any additional software to run, i.e., Steam and the other ridiculous spyware crap that is bundled with so many PC games today.

      "Ohhh... This games looks cool. Reviews are good. Wait a minute. It is Ubisoft. I better check to see if it is buggy crap like the last 20 games they released.... Yep. Ohhh... THIS game looks cool..."

    2. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by daid303 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Maybe you could give people an incentive to actually buy a PC game? First step would be to stop releasing broken-ass console ports to the PC market, I bet that would help sales a lot. Also, get rid of any additional software to run, i.e., Steam and the other ridiculous spyware crap that is bundled with so many PC games today.

      Funny that you mention steam. Because me (and more people like me) see steam as "DRM done right", instead of locking down the game so it becomes unplayable, steam has added value. No more hassle with keys. Download it everywhere. Easy access to forums with problem solutions. Integrated friends/join game functions (making playing with friends easy). Lots of discounts, and many indie games.

      Now excuse my while I go kill mom in binding of isaac.

    3. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by AngryDeuce · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because me (and more people like me) see steam as "DRM done right", instead of locking down the game so it becomes unplayable, steam has added value.

      That's all well and good; I know plenty of people that feel the same way about iTunes, but it should be up to the consumer to decide if they want to use that software. Many games are coming out nowadays requiring Steam, games that don't even have an online component at all require it.

      Besides, what happens when Steam goes offline? Millions upon millions of copies of games out there are going to turn into coasters or useless bits on a hard drive, and all because some far flung authentication server went offline. Certainly doesn't leave me with too many warm and fuzzy feelings...

    4. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I wouldn't laud Steam too much. All it takes is a memory glitch, and VAC has a good chance of perma-banning your account, and there goes all your game multiplayer access. To boot, you won't even have a manual or a little ring to show for the purchase. Good luck posting on the forums about that -- you will definitely be presumed guilty and laughed off the site.

    5. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by BeeRockxs · · Score: 2

      When Steam goes offline, you start Steam in offline mode, and still play your games.

    6. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by Kohath · · Score: 1

      Or, just don't bother to release PC games at all, which is the choice they've made. It seems like that solves their problem and yours.

    7. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by Nemyst · · Score: 2

      Notwithstanding how hypothetical it is to ask when Steam will go offline (this is after all the biggest digital distribution service on the PC by a very, very large margin), I would be extremely surprised that Valve hasn't already planned something for this kind of thing. They take it rather seriously (surely more than Sony anyways).

      I'll add one thing: I much prefer to have Steam DRM than any other form of DRM. I don't trust EA to keep their activation servers online for more than a year or two, but Steam will be there for many years to come, guaranteed. Of course, I'd rather have no DRM at all (or at least DRM getting stripped, like say Egosoft did with X3), which is why I support GOG a lot, but in the face of having mandatory DRM, Steam would be my first choice.

    8. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but in the face of having mandatory DRM

      No DRM is "mandatory." I get the DRM-free versions of most everything on The Pirate Bay all the time.

    9. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by gparent · · Score: 1

      Besides, what happens when Steam goes offline?

      Steam Friends and Steam Store goes down and you continue playing as if nothing happened.

    10. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by AngryDeuce · · Score: 1, Informative

      "Question: Must all of my computers have internet access to use Steam?"

      "Answer: Steam requires an internet connection for each computer intended to play Steam games."

      "Question: What is Steam's Offline Mode and how do I use it?"

      The Steam client application's files must be updated to allow for the use of Offline Mode.

      So, in order to play offline, I must go online to enable playing offline? And the game must be fully patched even if I am playing offline? And how does it verify if the game is fully patched? Does it need a web connection to check?

      Yeah, much easier to just steal the fucking game and have this idiotic shit stripped out from get go.

    11. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Steam goes offline, start steam in OFFLINE and play! Not their fault you have not updated the games fully so offline play is supported. Nor is it valves fault that a developer who is using steamworks has also implemented one of their hairbrained schemes to keep the game from being playable offline.

      captcha : erection

    12. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean offline permanently? Gabe promised long ago to release an update that removed the authentication part if Valve went bankrupt, so you'll still be able to play your games.

    13. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by Windwraith · · Score: 1

      Hell yeah Binding of Isaac, that's a little gem in there. It's one of those rare games that is terribly...err...."tasteless", but you don't care because it's loads of fun.

    14. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Steam works offline. Put that in your tinfoil hat and smoke it. I hear it's like the world is a bubble of glass and you're rubbing up against it, like a bad windshield wiper.

    15. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by Bucky24 · · Score: 1

      Valve has stated that if they ever decide to shut down the Steam platform or go out of business that they will unlock the DRM or do something to not require internet access anymore. If you're talking about the validation servers going offline, well that's happened a few times that I recall. The "loading your account" box was up for a few minutes, then it gave up and let me start in offline mode. Then I went and played TF2 (multiplayer still worked fine).

      If even that's too intrusive for you, you could always go with Impulse. The games you download from there don't even require a check with authentication servers. Then again the platform is being sold to GameStop...

      --
      All the world's a CPU, and all the men and women merely AI agents
    16. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by Venerable+Vegetable · · Score: 1

      After installing the game you need to start it one time while being online to verify. Which shouldn't be a problem as you need to be online to download the game in the first place. After this you can always start it offline.

      The game doesn't need to be fully patched. The second link you provide even specifically states that you can use offline mode if you do not want to patch your game.

      Your steam client, not the game, must be updated to enable offline play. Which again is no issue as it only knows that there is a new version available if you have an internet connection anyway.

    17. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      What's the point of Steam for single player games? Why do they need to be bound to Steam (assuming that is the case)? I don't care about offline mode, either. Perhaps someone just doesn't want Steam installed at all.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    18. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by Lunoria · · Score: 1

      Steam also can act as a publisher. The game companies can just use steam to patch their games. You can then run the game from the install directory. No DRM needed.

    19. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by Ardyvee · · Score: 1

      That's when you keep your crack at hand. But yes -- Steam is DRM done right. I don't mind running it if the game needs it, they offer these nice sales, and the game is up-to-date for most of the time. You mostly don't have to worry about. The only feature is the ability to install games on other partition/folder, and even that is already covered by independent developers

      --
      I don't care if I'm wrong. I only care about everyone obtaining something from the discussion.
    20. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good luck stealing it without an internet connection.

      The offline stuff in steam is pretty transparent. You really have to be stretching to make that your issue. Good to know they are doing such a good job.

    21. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by Xtravar · · Score: 1

      Steam is not nearly as annoying as iTunes, because there's no magic dance I need to do to transfer purchases from one device to another... but that's another story.

      Steam makes me buy more PC games than I could ever play, because it's all right there at my fingertips with enticing sales and instant gratification. Personally, I've bought every Assassin's Creed game on Steam as well, despite having played one or two on Xbox. Voting with my dollars... I support the series, I support Steam, and I support Ubisoft's support of the PC platform. Yes, you can all thank me for throwing dollars at Ubisoft to make PC somewhat profitable for them.

      Honestly, I'm probably one of the few that doesn't care about "crappy console ports". That's what my HTPC is - an Xbox 360 that can run games at 1080p/60fps.

      --
      Buckle your ROFL belt, we're in for some LOLs.
    22. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by guruevi · · Score: 2

      Well, VALVe has no obligation to keep their servers or software alive. If at any point they get into trouble, they'll be more than happy to pull the plug for some quick quarterly revenue. Even large companies like Microsoft pull their original Xbox online platform, EA regularly pulls down the servers for 3 year old games. Walmart and Microsoft (again) have pulled the plug on their music stores. VALVe won't do it now but I wouldn't trust them not to do it within a couple of years.

      Currently Steam is better than any other DRM but it's still DRM, they're managing your rights to a product you bought. When you find a CD within 20 years and want to play a game for nostalgic reasons (I recently found and loaded my stash of Amiga MOD music for example) you're not going to be able to play it because that company that once existed is no more.

      We're going head first into a digital dark age. When our great-grandkids are going to look back, they won't be able to do anything with any content we are currently creating because we're so afraid that someone might steal it and lose 3% revenue that we forget that those pirating bastards are at one point going to be the historians and librarians.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    23. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by Cito · · Score: 1, Insightful
      Exactly!

      that's why every game I legitimately buy, if it requires steam the first thing I do is log on demonoid.me or kat.ph and download the cracked exe, I don't download the entire thing just the crack

      then I can play the game I bought how I want.

      I have never installed steam on any computer I own, yet I play 4 games that require steam, Skyrim is one, but I bought Skyrim and installed the crack so it doesn't require steam.

      easy peasy fuck steam.

      Hell the skyrim forums are full of page after page of steam bugs with overlay causing skyrim to crash to desktop... but zero crashes for me :)

      Always grab a no stream crack for your games, the games play better and less cpu/ram that steam is eating is more for the game :)

    24. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by Shikaku · · Score: 1

      This is a load of shit.

      First of all, if there was a memory glitch that corrupted a file/code in memory, you're much more likely to just CRASH.

      Second, the chances of it being beneficial are even more negligible. Again, you're just gonna crash and burn, either the OS or the game, or be unable to see something important.

      Third, they have flags and when a flag is arisen they watch you more carefully. They don't VAC ban anyone immediately when you are suspicious, they wait 2-4 weeks after the fact (1. so hackers can't determine what caused it to go off, and 2. to verify you are cheating and not just a random fuckup)

      Fourth, they have made a mistake and not only fixed it by unbanning but also giving out a free game: http://gamingbolt.com/valve-to-unban-steam-modern-warfare-2-players (however, MW games are much more sensitive in that any file modification matters. in a game like TF2 you can replace all the models most of the time and as long as they don't give a huge advantage valve won't actually care)

    25. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Funny, I think GOG is DRM done right.

    26. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by Nurgel · · Score: 1

      I've had my account hijacked once on Steam, and thought I'd never get it back because of the same "proof" problem you mentioned. I emailed Steam support with a product activation key from an email receipt (I think it was Half Life 2) and they used this as proof that I was the legitimate account owner and set things straight within a day. Its not nearly like you're making it out to be.

    27. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by Nemyst · · Score: 1

      Valve is not a publicly traded company. This changes a LOT of things, namely that quarterly revenue doesn't interest them quite as much.

      This isn't to say they're shining white knights, but they're certainly better off than most.

    28. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Sadly. not being public makes it *easier* for them to sell out to someone that will shut them down.

    29. Re:Crazy idea, I know... by rapidreload · · Score: 1

      Well first off, ignore anyone who says "Offline mode". The problem is that despite Steam having offline mode, it WILL require you to connect to Steam servers at some point afterwards for you to continue to use offline mode (just to verify you're not cheating the system I guess), so that's not a long term solution.

      However, you CAN get cracked Steam launchers which are basically stripped-down Steam clients who's sole purpose is to launch games you have installed in Steam. They're totally offline and work just fine, and unlike the official client don't require the occasional call to mother. Should Valve ever close down, those will be your option. Not completely legal of course, but morally? Totally legit.

      Well at least it's the only way I can feel OK being a PC gamer these days. The indie games just aren't fun enough compared to something like Deus Ex: Human Revolution, so I have to compromise if I want to buy my games still.

      --
      To all newcomers - people here are very close-minded and can't handle complaints about Linux. Keep this in mind.
  10. Maybe it looks like f***cking shit compared to BF3 by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 1

    Maybe it looks like f***cking shit compared to BF3...

    And Ubisoft knows it.

  11. Consoles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As we all know, there is absolutely no piracy present on any of the available consoles!

    captcha: burglar

  12. What do you expect? by Superken7 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The fact that many games (including this one) does not sell well among PC gamers is no secret. I don't like Ubisoft because they do lots of bad ports and put very aggressive DRM on some of their games, but right now I can't blame them for being realistic. This is no WoW, no StarCraft, no Minecraft, its one of those games that can sell tons on consoles but almost nothing on PCs. It's not like this is something new, the data is there, it's not an opinion. They know it isn't going to sell well in the PC platform and I don't think you can blame them for not throwing money at a risky move right away.

    1. Re:What do you expect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There's a difference between saying "hey, we did some math and figured that our profit margin probably won't be where we like it, so we'll put this port on ice, sowwy :(" and doing an Epic and throw a public tantrum blaming imaginary enemies (I say imaginary because yes piracy is a problem, but no, all those downloads do not translate into sales - likewise second hand sales of console games does not translate into sales either).

      I for one think people/gamers would react better to the former than the taunting nature of the latter behaviour (then again, if they are trolling for media attention perhaps they should hire someone from the piratebay to do their PR, they did wonderfull things with letters from lawyers).

    2. Re:What do you expect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I don't think you can blame them for not throwing money at a risky move right away

      No, but you can blame them for throwing a temper tantrum about piracy when their games have the most obnoxious user experience ever.

      Ubisoft, you stopped making PC games almost a decade ago. The only releases I've seen from you were either half-hearted console ports or poorly implemented sequels to great games because you bought the original studio thinking their quality would rub off on you. I'm glad that you finally realize that you have no reason to be in this business.

      Good riddance.

    3. Re:What do you expect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think anybody would blame them for doing that, but be honest about it, don't tell lies about piracy being the reason for not releasing, be honest and say the business case simply isn't there. There's no shame in that, and it would lose you anywhere near as many customers as spouting lies.

    4. Re:What do you expect? by AdamJS · · Score: 2

      Except this is a systemic, spiteful response that has been growing for quite some time.
      Ubisoft has been hurting their PC consumers' experience in the name of "stopping piracy" for a while now.

      Which is a horrible way to do business. It's like a grocery store frisking every single person that comes in because somebody once stole something off of their external delivery trucks.

    5. Re:What do you expect? by AdamJS · · Score: 1

      Also, their statements are based entirely off of B&M sales, and not digital sales.
      So if they want to say "the market isn't there", they should say "the walmart and gamestop market isn't there" and stop being disingenuous.

    6. Re:What do you expect? by houstonbofh · · Score: 1

      There's no shame in that, and it would lose you anywhere near as many customers as spouting lies.

      They have thinking customers left to lose?

    7. Re:What do you expect? by eddy · · Score: 1

      Maybe I was the last one. I cancelled my AC:R CE preorder yesterday. Tired of these guys spitting in my face while accepting my premium day-0 dollars. No more.

      --
      Belief is the currency of delusion.
    8. Re:What do you expect? by AngryDeuce · · Score: 2

      But that's their biggest market for clueless consumers that don't know the game they're buying is a piece of shit! What are they supposed to do, make good games? Don't you know how expensive that is???

    9. Re:What do you expect? by Nemyst · · Score: 1

      How can you know it won't sell? It hasn't even been released!

      Or do you mean it's derivative, generic and uninteresting? In which case it's not a matter of PC gamers not buying that kind of game, it's a matter of making a good game to get sales.

      From what I've seen, I Am Alive certainly looks unique in many ways and I don't exactly see how you can conclude it won't be popular with no analysis, no experience, nothing.

    10. Re:What do you expect? by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 2

      They are mistaking their goals. They think their goal should be to prevent piracy. It isn't, they shouldn't care. Their goal is to maximize sales. While those could potentially be related, you go about things differently. You don't do things that reduce piracy, but also reduce legit customers.

      Think of it like a retail store:

      Retail stores want to reduce shrinkage (shoplifting) because it costs them money. Unlike piracy it costs real money too, not just potential sales, they lose the value of the goods stolen. However that really isn't their main goal. Their goal is to make more money, to increase sales. Hence they may take actions that actually would increase shrinkage, if the net result is higher sales overall.

      After all, they could probably reduce it to zero by having armed guards strip search all customers and employees on entrance and exit. However that would probably also reduce sales to zero and thus be useless. So they take reasonable measures, that don't hassle customers.

      As a less extreme example, they could reduce it by getting rid of all those small items like gum and candy near the register. They are easy to pocket, and there is a lot of activity so it is hard to notice if someone does. They don't though. Why? Because the impulse sales they get of those more than makes up any additional losses from people pilfering them.

      Game publishers need to understand, especially since there are no real losses with piracy, that the goal is selling more games. You do what it takes to do that. Don't worry about piracy, worry about sales.

  13. Newest DRM scheme! by dyingtolive · · Score: 2

    "They've broken everything else, so we've moved to the scorched earth policy. Let's see them pirate a game that doesn't exist!"

    --
    Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
    1. Re:Newest DRM scheme! by AngryDeuce · · Score: 1

      "A strange game. The only winning move is not to play."

      "How about a nice game of chess?"

    2. Re:Newest DRM scheme! by houstonbofh · · Score: 1

      Next they shut down. That will stop those damn pirates!

    3. Re:Newest DRM scheme! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given that Ubisoft will now have an angry studio under their thumb full of potential leak sources (with very little to lose given that their jobs are probably dead in the water), the sheer hubris of this move, the demand and the sheer poetic irony of it as a great "Well fuck you too, Ubisoft", that may very well happen.

    4. Re:Newest DRM scheme! by Shillo · · Score: 1

      I'm sure the pirates will rise to the challenge. Coming next: Xbox to PC pirate port.

      -With- extended graphical config menu and customisable controls. Out of spite.

      --
      I refuse to use .sig
    5. Re:Newest DRM scheme! by dyingtolive · · Score: 1

      Ah yes, spite. The only force in this world still more powerful than money.

      --
      Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
  14. Different audience by Hentes · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The real reason is that a game dumbed down for console players won't sell well on PC.

    1. Re:Different audience by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      Or laden with such DRM, that if you want to enjoy the game in your remote lodge you are screwed...

  15. Is there any data to back up whining about piracy? by HBI · · Score: 1

    I mean, does anyone ever gain increased profit from the complaining? Then why do it? It just encourages me to never even try any of their games.

    --
    HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
  16. Valve Software by arthurpaliden · · Score: 4, Informative

    They should take a leaf out of the Valve Software marketing handbook.

    http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/10/25/gabe-newell-on-piracy-and-steams-success-in-russia/

    1. Re:Valve Software by cheesewire · · Score: 2

      Yup, it's only yesterday I was reading this piece about an interview with Gabe Newell..."Our goal is to create greater service value than pirates, and this has been successful enough for us that piracy is basically a non-issue for our company"...

    2. Re:Valve Software by sandytaru · · Score: 2

      This is the same tack that Crunchy Roll took with anime. Subtitled anime piracy has slowed down a good bit, because people will willingly watch streaming high quality subs that are immediately available legally on Crunchy Roll, and not download them because they only wanted to watch the episode once. Crunchy Roll actually brokered a deal with animation studios to acquire the episode a week ahead of time and churn out a good, quality fansub in that period. Most fans will happily watch a short ad (hell, sometimes they include the original Japanese commercials for the audience) and then their 20 minutes of imported cartoons, and then buy the DVD a year later when the slow-as-a-whale distribution studios release it locally (dubbed.) Everyone wins, and piracy is greatly reduced.

      --
      Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
    3. Re:Valve Software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course, this really only works as an analogy if Steam started out as a fancy UI version of the Pirate Bay.

      I will never use Crunchyroll until after they have been taken to court and are made to pay damages for the illegal distribution they had the gall to charge money for. Hell, they didn't even translate it on their own, their just piled together the translations other people put out for free. Yes, those free subtitles were still illegal, but charging for it makes it worse, legally and ethically. And then they still had fansubbed stuff up long after the deals started rolling in, and blamed the users for it.

      Read or listen to any interview with the founders. They dance around it and won't even acknowledge their past actions. They sound worse than politicians getting called on campaign promises.

    4. Re:Valve Software by sandytaru · · Score: 1

      I have no idea what you are talking about. Some background explanation is in order if you are going to discuss something serious enough to warrant lawsuits.

      --
      Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
  17. Not a big deal. by Surjikal · · Score: 1

    Less competition on the PC means more PC games by other publishers and indie game developers.

    1. Re:Not a big deal. by houstonbofh · · Score: 2

      Yep. If the Humble Indie Bundle can make a million and Ubisoft can not, that says something about them!

    2. Re:Not a big deal. by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 2

      And that's a million on choose your own price.

      After I bought the bundle, I sat and watched the sales counter, and the total raised counter, tick past for a while. I couldn't get over the number of assholes who were literally paying a single lousy US cent for the bundle. I think they were in the majority. Heavens knows how they got the average price figures they did - there must be a lot of people who pay way over the odds.

      I would even believe that processing transactions like that costs more than the money you take in.

      I mean, WTF? This is for a children's charity.

    3. Re:Not a big deal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How are they assholes for paying an accepted price for an offered product?

    4. Re:Not a big deal. by guruevi · · Score: 1

      I usually pay what I think it's worth, about $5-10 per game and a couple of bucks for charity so it usually ends up being between $25 and $50. They also got the option if you pay more than $3 per game (or somewhere around that) you'll get more stuff in the future (still waiting on Splot though). But some games are definitely worth it, I think Trine alone is worth $25, Trine 2 will definitely be a buy for me. I understand there are those that can't pay for it but that's regardless of the game. Limiting the coverage of your game simply because you don't get payed for it doesn't really help selling your games in the future. I couldn't pay for SC1 in the past (I was a poor kid) but now that I have grown up I bought the collectors edition ($100) of SC2 and I will pay for all 3.

      I don't think transaction costs are really a problem, they'll probably pay a percentage on all the transactions.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    5. Re:Not a big deal. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I mean, WTF? This is for a children's charity.

      The problem with the charity choices for me atleast is that they're localized to USA, so if I donate through them, only American kids will enjoy the money while plummeting us down the hill.

  18. quite a paradoxical approach. by g00mbasv · · Score: 5, Insightful

    so Ubi calls the vast majorty of us pc gamers THIEVES and then they expect us (the non pirate ones) to support them? wow! now that's the most weird customer loyalty tactic I have ever seen. reverse psychology perhaps?

    1. Re:quite a paradoxical approach. by Dyinobal · · Score: 1

      It is cool Epic games tried the same thing when their golden boy gears of war failed horribly on the PC.

    2. Re:quite a paradoxical approach. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so Ubi calls the vast majorty of us pc gamers THIEVES and then they expect us (the non pirate ones) to support them? wow! now that's the most weird customer loyalty tactic I have ever seen. reverse psychology perhaps?

      Pirates are in this year!

    3. Re:quite a paradoxical approach. by Kohath · · Score: 0

      Who said Ubisoft expects you to support them?

    4. Re:quite a paradoxical approach. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they're trying for the Stockholm syndrome.

      It's not working.

  19. Good job Ubisoft.. by smnanthny · · Score: 0

    Wow Ubisoft have had a brilliant idea... Seeing as they've lost a small part of their audience to game piracy, lets just remove it from that platform completely and punish the people who actually pay for their games. I guess they could have just designed a system to try and stop people for pirating their game but that makes wayyy too much sense and would actually involve some thinking. Good job alienating the PC market!

  20. Needs a comparison by bhunachchicken · · Score: 1

    What I'd like to see, and something that games companies never seem to provide, is how the sales on each platform stack up against one another.

    People say that PC games sell well on Steam (such as Skyrim), but I'd love to see the total sales to date, and how those sales stack up on the PC, the Xbox and the PS3.

    After that, maybe we'll get better clarity on why companies seem to be walking away from the PC more and more these days.

    Note - I used to game on PC about 10 years ago, but bought into a PS1 to play FF7. I now game exclusively on consoles, since... well, I just find the breadth of games on offer is higher (I imagine that comment will get some people's hackles up, but you simply don't get games like God of War 3, Uncharted, Vanquish or Dark Souls on Windows...)

    1. Re:Needs a comparison by AngryDeuce · · Score: 3, Informative

      After that, maybe we'll get better clarity on why companies seem to be walking away from the PC more and more these days.

      The fact that they can milk the fuck out of console players with DLC probably doesn't hurt, either.

      This is why developers love the shit out of consoles.

    2. Re:Needs a comparison by AdamJS · · Score: 1

      "How it stacks up" doesn't matter.
      If a game makes $10 million on its first initial PC release, then the sequel makes $50 million on consoles and $10 million on PC with a similar budget, then they have no excuse to bog down/abandon Sequel 2. Yes, it's not *as* profitable as the console games, but it's still as profitable as it was in the first place, if not more.

      Instead, they cut off a foot to spite their backpack. It's just nonsensical.

    3. Re:Needs a comparison by Bucky24 · · Score: 1

      Well, they can do that on PC too. Just sayin...

      --
      All the world's a CPU, and all the men and women merely AI agents
    4. Re:Needs a comparison by AngryDeuce · · Score: 1

      They can and do, now, especially on services like Steam, but it's nowhere near as prevalent as it seems to be on consoles, especially XBL. There's fucking DLC for anything on there...

  21. So, nothing to do with activation woes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, nothing to do with activation woes. Or the dropping of titles to push only a few high-profit retreads (cf "CoD MW3").

    Gotta be pirates.

    Really.

    I thought DRM solved piracy? Isn't that what they say when users, stymied in their attempts to play the game they bought, complain about the DRM?

  22. Is that so? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I guess BF3 should have sold 100 million copies and MW should have sold 200 million copies? Oh, those are multiplayer games you say? Skyrim should have sold 68 million copies then?
    ( Note: these are launch day sales )

    How about you make a great game, price is appropriately and it will sell itself.

    Besides, looking at myself, I've stopped pirating when I grew older and started earning some real money. I still won't buy Skyrim for €50, but I've grown so old I don't care anymore that I don't get to play the latest and greatest. I'll buy it once it reaches the price I want to pay for it. You are complaining that your cash strapped audience isn't spending it's money on you, fine, having them spend it in smaller amounts might work it might not. It still doesn't disqualify the old (and my preferred) way of selling a game.

    1. Re:Is that so? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've grown so old I don't care anymore that I don't get to play the latest and greatest. .

      Oh dear God! I was fine untill you said this and I realised this is MY reasoning too. My precious denial, all smashed and ruined!

  23. Oh your poor little thing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ubisoft just LOVES making these remarks about how piracy is destroying the gaming market. And the billion that CoD has made in ONE week? They are disgusting pigs who love money above everything.

  24. (B)ubisoft by yodleboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    See ya Ubi, won't be missing you. Your games are really nothing special anymore and your insistence on requiring your own DRM service ON TOP OF STEAM is just ridiculous. I won't log in twice and maintain separate accounts for you anymore. Likewise, I won't have to lose access to my games when not online (something that Steam is frequently accused of, but MOST games can be played offline on Steam after the initial download and activation).

    You look at a PC market where other companies are making millions in SALES and blame piracy for your woes. I haven't bought an Ubi game since the last Splinter Cell, I must be pirating your crap now right? Wrong, I'm just spending my money on games from other publishers. Take your ball and go home, I didn't even know you had a ball anymore.

  25. Blame it on the players... by dskzero · · Score: 3, Insightful
    ... conveniently forget your games are terrible.

    Ubisoft is a terrible company, most of their games are bugged mess with monstruous DRM that no one on their right minds would ever pay for them: do you really think you're losing money because people pirate your games? Do you even think these people would even buy them if they couldn't pirate them? Take the last HOMM game, for example: a terrible, dumbed down version of a once great series: frankly, the only way peple are going to play that is pirating them. How come Skyrim, Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Crysis and other AAA titles on the PC still manage to sell? Because they are *good* games. Stop trying to make yourself look good: The Wii must be the most pirated platform of all time, yet it's by far the most succesfull one in terms of money. You're just being thick now.

    --
    Oblivion Awaits
    1. Re:Blame it on the players... by lexman098 · · Score: 1

      Do you even think these people would even buy them if they couldn't pirate them?

      That is the right question. The raw piracy numbers are irrelevant when you ignore this.

    2. Re:Blame it on the players... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny that Skyrim manages to sell even though it too (and all previous games from the company) is a bugged mess. Must be because the underlying game is actually fun for the audience. Ubisoft hasn't found its niche yet.

  26. Expert Excrement Expeditors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Yes, yes, Its the piracy. Its got nothing at all to do with you pumping out more shovelware than Ames used to way back when...

  27. Console Piracy by zandeez · · Score: 1

    They do know it's easier to pirate console games than it is PC games? All current-gen consoles now have some form of custom firmware that allows you to run pirated games. And its easier to do than pirating PC games.

  28. Re:Maybe it looks like f***cking shit compared to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    do you fanboys think that anyone cares to read these posts? nerd rage!!!!

  29. Consoles can be hacked as well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Funny because you can easily download games for the Wii, Playstation and Xbox. Its just as easy if not easier on the consoles! Its probably easier to make the games for the consoles and is why they are doing it.

  30. I guess that means their DRM failed by Tridus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Wasn't Ubi's absurd DRM supposed to fix this piracy thing? I guess it didn't work, and rather then admit that it drove all the paying customers away instead they want to say that somehow it failed and everybody pirated everything.

    News flash - Your DRM sucks. I still haven't bought Settlers 7 because of it, and I likely never will. Another game got that money instead.

    But I guess there's too many MBAs working there to figure out something so simple.

    --
    -- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
    1. Re:I guess that means their DRM failed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't buy it anyway, it's so dumbed down it's not even funny. There's no real battle, you just click on your group of soldiers, and click on the town they should attack, and then it does the rest. You can't control the soldiers individually at all, or do sneak attacks because of their idiotic system.

      And yes, the DRM is horrible. Settlers 3 FTW,

  31. Game piracy software is not a issue by Tei · · Score: 3, Insightful

    http://gamingbolt.com/gabe-newell-piracy-is-a-non-issue-to-valve-providing-better-services-will-result-in-more-sales

    The thing is... pirates are not your customers, are a pool of people that may or may not buy your stuff, but your market is the people that buy games. This is obvious for a lot of people now, and for some of then, is a way to make a lot of money. Valve is swimming of money because understand this. Ubisoft is full of retards that can't understand this.

    --

    -Woof woof woof!

  32. Yes, I will "bitch" about it, a little by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "PC gamers shouldn’t “bitch” about it, ‘I Am Alive’ creative director Stanislas Mettra said in a recent interview. In his commentary Mettra insinuates that many of the people who are asking for a PC release are in fact going to end up pirating the game."

    That's fine. The only games I have on my PC are either freely-released ones or ones that I have legitimately purchased, and I don't own a console. A couple of the games I've purchased are Ubisoft titles. I guess they don't want my business anymore. A shame, really, but I guess I'm a market that isn't worth their trouble anymore.

    Incidentally, I regularly buy a game and then download a cracked version so that I don't have to deal with DRM nonsense, so I hope they aren't taking the 'piracy' stats at face value. I have learned to tolerate Steam's DRM, but A) I don't like it, B) it isn't draconian (it doesn't cut off play if you're already validated once or playing off-line), and C) it does offer some benefits (e.g., keeping track of friends playing the same game, and making it more difficult for people to use hacks to get an advantage in the game). Ubisoft's DRM systems are ridiculous *and* ineffective. It makes me wonder why they are wasting money on the DRM instead of figuring out other ways to encourage people to do the right thing and pay for the game.

  33. Ubisoft, ubisoft by eddy · · Score: 1

    They're like, to borrow a similie, the suicide jumper standing at the top of a tall building, threatening to jump while shouting incoherently. Except they never fucking jump! They just hang around the edge, trying to get attention from passers by. By lamely taunting them. "You sir, you're a THIEF and I'm going to JUMP! That's right.. walk away.. theif! I'm JUMPING?! YOU HEAR ME?"

    Look, if you don't want to develop actual PC games that PC gamers like, then we're all OK with you bowing out. One day your "innovative" DRM has cured the piracy problem and you're very happy, the next day 95% of your customers are thieves and to blame for games not being released. Okay... but either way, if you don't like it WHY DON'T YOU FUCKING STOP? Just fucking leap already you schizophrenic pieces of shit! That way you don't have to complain about piracy any more, in your non-piracy console nirvana where all the money is.

    I'm sure if it's like you say, that there are no money in the PC market, then your stock should rise once you declare your intention to stop developing PC titles. Right? SO WHY DON'T YOU?

    You've taken your dump. Now take your spades and pot and get out of the fucking sandbox.

    Next time someone bring up "the self-entitled whiny PC-gamers", think about these guys. Right, us players are the whiners?

    --
    Belief is the currency of delusion.
    1. Re:Ubisoft, ubisoft by mlts · · Score: 1

      Ubisoft knows that the second they leave the PC market, there will be a company taking their place making games that people want to play with little to no DRM.

      There is plenty of room in the market for another Blizzard, Origin Bethesda, Bioware, ID, or heck, another Popcap.

      Yes, people use consoles for playing, but PCs will have a far larger impact, since there are far more PCs than consoles in use. So, a well designed game that can run on fairly modest hardware would do well on a fraction of the PC market than the console market.

      What will help is the advent of stores/repos as part of the OS. This way, a decent game is a download away, and all it would take is clicking on a link, and clicking "purchase" for it to be bought. For a reasonable price, that may bring about as much revenue as having a blockbuster release at Gamestop, especially because one wouldn't have to worry about DRM, packaging, or installation costs for the platform. Apple's and Microsoft's 30% commission may seem steep, but they handle the installation, maintain servers for updates, and they deal with the DRM, so game companies are likely to come out ahead in that department.

  34. 95% seems high... by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    If 95% of their customers are pirating the game, something is very, very wrong with their marketing. Pirating games isn't as easy as that for a regular user. The question I have then is: is there anyone playing games on PC that isn't an advanced user? It's true that most PCs come with Intel Graphics, which won't play these games. Someone that can install a graphics card can probably pirate a game. But that said there are plenty of gaming rigs for under $400 (which isn't much more than a game console these days). Plus there's tonnes of WOW players that paid for graphics upgrades, and have dropped the WOW habit. These guys aren't going to be pirating anything. I guess you could say it's a tough market because they don't want to play games right now, but really it's the job of sales and marketing to make them want to :).

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:95% seems high... by AdamJS · · Score: 1

      Piracy is actually easier than normally playing most Ubisoft games.

      I'm not even kidding. Their installers are buggy, their ports are quite shoddy and their DRM implementations are outright broken and subject to frequent failure. On top of that, their support and their forums are counter-productive and often silence large swaths of consumers that complain when NewGameX isn't working at all. It's easier to torrent a game, install it with 2 clicks, then just *play*.

      Ubisoft is one of the few companies that you can safely say that there are a large amount of pirates specifically because they spite PC gamers.

    2. Re:95% seems high... by AngryDeuce · · Score: 2

      Agree 100%. When the pirated experience is 100 times better than the legitimate one, who's fault is that?

      Back in the day, before the PC developers got greedy and wanted to milk every possible revenue stream, they used to encourage modders to add content to their games. Many bugs were fixed with patches developed for free by fans in the gaming community. Then they realized that allowing people to create their own new content was cutting off their revenue stream to create their own new content, but even that wasn't so bad.

      It was when they locked out the community and started racing to the bottom that shit got really ridiculous. Official expansions started adding less and less content for the same price, and then, once internet connectivity became a standard in consoles, DLC became the norm and the race to the bottom got even lower. Now they don't even have to release a proper full game at launch, they can release 2/3's of one and then sell you the rest for another ten or twenty bucks a few months down the road. And God Forbid it's a multiplayer game like CoD, they can milk the map pack bullshit for at least a year or two, and if you don't want to buy them, that's cool, they'll just degrade your online experience until you either stop playing (and thus get your poor ass off their servers) or you give in and buy the fucking add-ons.

      Ubisoft can suck a dick.

    3. Re:95% seems high... by DanielRavenNest · · Score: 1

      Interestingly, Crytek did an inadvertent experiment along those lines. The initial release of Crysis 2/CryEngine 3 did not include DirectX 11 for the PC, or the Mod SDK (which includes the Sandbox level editor). When those got released some time later, PC sales accelerated, and are still going relatively strong. Apparently the value of a game goes up when you enable community mods.

    4. Re:95% seems high... by AngryDeuce · · Score: 1

      Absolutely. And it's not necessarily limited to the PC, either; I've put thousands of hours into the game Farcry 2, which has an amazing map editor for a console. Whereas most console games, especially FPS's, die off on XBL after 6 months or so, there are still tons of people playing Farcry 2, and they're predominately playing custom designed maps. The game had a ton of value added and it cost Ubisoft nothing, just by allowing the community to create their own maps. I probably spent more time designing my own custom maps than I did playing on them, and the creativity in some of the maps was truly mind-blowing, enough that Ubisoft really should have put them on the payroll for level design.

      It's amazing how the same company can have two completely different mindsets when it comes to things like this.

    5. Re:95% seems high... by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Hey, thanks for the headsup on Far Ctry 2, didn't know it had an editor. (though I must admit I haven't even made any LBP levels)

  35. Dont care - cry me a river by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The very fact it is a ubisoft game means it's going to be geared towards a console and hence unplayable and shit on a pc. I dont even bother wasting the time using my band width downloading it.

  36. of OUR customers? by kennethmci · · Score: 1

    i dont understand the quote "95% of OUR customers"? are these people who have previously purchased their games and are now downloading them? I think its safe to say that not everyone who illegally downloads a game would have actually went out and purchased it. the fact that someone is getting it easily and for free can be reason enough for them to download it. so if they're saying that the number of people downloading illegally makes up 95% of their active installs of a game, this doesn't necessarily make all these installs lost customers to piracy...

  37. High expections meet reality by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

    I bet if someone could go buy the game for $5 it wouldn't be worth the trouble to wait for a big ass download. They would just go buy it. Making millions of dollars on top of millions of dollars on top of millions of dollars on every game isn't possible. Buying a game for $60+, jumping through DRM hoops to get it installed, having to drag out DVD's to play it, and the game turning out to suck isn't sufficient incentive to buy games. Even if the game was the be all to end all it isn't worth it to kids who have less money than parents who are damn near broke these days too. Rumor has it cheap phone games are selling hot and heavy. Get a clue. People buy pirated goods because the originals are too expensive. Nobody is going to pirate something if they loose money. Nobody is going to by a knockoff if the original is affordable. Quit trying to be a billionaire off the backs of people with $2 in the bank.

    Now get off my lawn you DRM loving MAFIAA cock suckers!

    --
    Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
  38. DRM by piripiri · · Score: 1

    DRM that will pollute your experience

    At least they admit DRM is shitty.

  39. I'd just like to say this by Runefox · · Score: 1

    I am the 5%.

    Not to Ubisoft, though. I don't know the last time I bought an Ubisoft title. Quite frankly, none of their games are all that interesting, and I'm not taking my chances with their DRM, either. I've got all of this generation's consoles, but really, if you're going to fuck with one platform, you kind of fucked with me regardless. Real smooth, Ubisoft.

    Anyway, I kind of knew that Ubisoft's DRM scheme was all for the purpose of pushing to console-only development. I guess they'll save money by removing a platform from their development cycles (the way consoles are now, optimizing for them to get what we have now graphically isn't an easy task) and they won't have to worry about piracy anymore - Except they probably aren't actually losing an appreciable number of sales to piracy to begin with anyway.

    --
    Screw the rules, I have green hair!
    1. Re:I'd just like to say this by AdamJS · · Score: 1

      It's a strategy that's caught on with a few developers. Management wants to stick to console games and abandon PC altogether, but they need to justify it to management. So they release a shitty version or shitty ports or bog it down with shitty DRM and then do some pompous release-study that they can use to say "See? PC is a dying and unprofitable platform!"

    2. Re:I'd just like to say this by AdamJS · · Score: 1

      *Justify it to the Publishers' management and executives.
      Argh.

    3. Re:I'd just like to say this by Beerdood · · Score: 1

      I am the 5%.

      You're part of the problem! Occupy Pirate Bay!

      --
      Global warming and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking number of pirates - Gospel of the FSM
  40. To many bad console games ported to PC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's just too many sub-par games selling at $50+ on the PC-platform and too many console ports as well. I own MW1 (good game, the SP portion) and MW2 (sub-par game) for the PC and while I feel MW1 was worth the money, MW2 was absolutely not. For $50 I expect to get a polished game under development for years (examples would be HL2 and SC2). Not some quick hack with console UI remnants.

    I already know which games I will purchase in 2012: CS:GO, Dota2, Diablo 3, SC2:HotS and Mass Effect 3 (despite the console UI, I'll make an exception here).

    But basically; any developer that doesn't bother with removing "press any key to continue" in the PC version intro screen will NOT be getting my money. And unless it's a Valve or Blizzard game I will not spend money on anything if there isn't a demo for me to try first. Let me try before I buy and i _MIGHT_ buy the game.

    I might pick up Skyrim once it drops to $10. By then there ought to be a few patches and mods to remove the console UI. Same with Rage. BF3 beta was crap, just more CoD style game play with perks and levels (which does not belong in an FPS at all!) so I'll never pick up that either.

  41. Here's a even crazier idea: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since it's physically impossible to own, sell, steal or buy a game itself (hence it is just saying "license"), and all you do is buy a box with a medium with the game on it, how about..., you know..., give up the delusion and start living in reality?
    "But then our protection racket won't work anymore!" Oh noes!

    Making software is a service. It always was and it always will be. You ask money for the production of the game, because it is work. You can not ask money for the result of that work itself, since it is not a physical object, but information, which is free, in a sense that it can not be controlled who passes it on to whom, without putting chips in each and everyone's head, and that it doesn't cost any work at all to make a copy for everyone to use.

    All they do, is do work *once*, but demand to be paid *infinite* times, without doing any more work.
    Which is fraud. Plain and simple.

    1. Re:Here's a even crazier idea: by euroq · · Score: 1

      Your statements are incorrect. You certainly can ask for the result of the work itself, which is how it's always been.

      Also, people who create creative things work *once* but demand to be paid for each person who uses it, not an infinite amount of times. It's like saying Six Flags built an amusement park *once* but demands to be paid *infinite* times, for every person who comes to the park, without doing any more work.

      --
      Just because the U.S. is a republic does not mean it is not a democracy. Democracy/republic are not mutually exclusive.
  42. Surrender Profits To Spite Pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the article, the creative director blaming the lack of a PC release on piracy estimates they might need twelve guys working three months to create a PC port, but that this wouldn't be worth it if they only sold, e.g., 50,000 PC copies due to piracy. Twelve guys working 3 months costs the same as 3 years of the average salary of those 12 guys. Let's say the average salary is $100,000 (I assume this is generous, since most of the work will be developers / QA types, which I've heard tend to get paid less in the game industry, on average, than other industries). That means by his own estimate, making a port would cost $300,000. If they sell 50,000 copies, piracy or no, then they only need to take in $6 per copy to recover this cost.

    I don't know what their pricing would be - I assume it's not the usual $60 per game, since it's being sold on Xbox / PS3 - and I don't know if there are any other significant costs aside from the porting cost, but it seems to me that going forward with the PC port looks like a reasonable proposition. They seem to be indicating that selling 50,000 copies isn't too difficult to do, even in the face of piracy. If they make a PC port and end up with 1 billion people pirating, but generate 50,000 sales, that's about a 99.995% piracy rate, but if the prices make up for the costs, that's also additional profit they would not otherwise make.

    So while I'll admit, I'm just guessing here, as I don't know if I'm overlooking any costs, it looks to me like the piracy excuse is flimsy. If that's their real reason for not pirating, and the numbers above play out (and those are based partially on the statements of their own employee), then they're turning down potential profit just to spite the pirates. Doesn't seem like a great decision, business-wise, to me. The only way piracy hurts them is if some non-negligible fraction of the pirates would have purchased the console version if the PC version wasn't available to pirate. That just doesn't seem to realistic to me.

    1. Re:Surrender Profits To Spite Pirates by AdamJS · · Score: 1

      While it may not be specified, a large part of their conclusions should (but probably aren't; they're lairs, after all) be based off of the asset worth of programmers/developers, who are worth more working on "new" projects.

      That is to say, a shelf in a grocery store holding items with a $1 profit IS profitable, but it's "unprofitable" compared to if it was holding items with a $2 profit.

    2. Re:Surrender Profits To Spite Pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a good point, one I hadn't considered. The question I would have on this is whether there really is much additional value shifting these three months of developer effort to new projects. A good video on this idea is here:

      http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/the-pre-production-problem

      The video here talks about how added pre-production time tends to save money for the game developers in the long-run by allowing more planning and organisation rather than figuring out everything on-the-fly. One of the big obstacles they mention that makes more pre-production time less common is that there's often not much for the technical staff (rather than the creative staff) to do during this time, and so there's a perception of it as wasting the money spent on these developers. Seems to me this kind of scenario could be a good match for this problem - have some developers port the code while a new team spends a bit more time in pre-production / planning.

      There's also the potential that the developers used in the porting effort may only need to be on a lower-tier, talent/experience-wise and cost-wise, in their development staff, as you would imagine a well-designed bit of code for the Xbox would not be terribly difficult to port to Windows. If this is true, then it seems possible that you would would not be "losing" the value gained by having them work on new projects, since these folks would be making lesser contributions, anyway. By the time they're able to join the project later, your more experienced staff could have made it so there's more low-hanging fruit accessible to the less-capable team.

      Of course, all that depends on how things are organised, what their schedule looks like, etc., so it may not be applicable.

  43. Beyond Good and Evil 2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...is the only reason why I'm not just hoping Ubisoft disappears off the face of the earth :(

  44. Other reasons by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

    How about:
    - stop doing remakes of Doom/Quake/Unreal. A first-person shooter is a first-person shooter. Yes you can change the maps, the guns, the enemies and the plot all you want but at the end of the day it's all the same game.
    - stop adding too much complexity and stop porting games from consoles without thinking about the controls. Don't tell me to press "Yellow button X" or "Triangle" when I'm on a computer. I'm using a keyboard and a mouse here, not a damn Xbox gamepad. Also, no option to invert the Y axis is a deal killer. I've been using inverted Y axis for over 20 years now, asking me to use regular Y axis is like asking me to drive a car and turn left to go right.
    - about 10% of the market is now using Macs. But those stupid numbers are from sales and people with a Mac don't upgrade as often, so the actual installed base is probably a lot higher. Game not available on Mac OS X = no sale.
    - a lot of your past customers are now older, have a family, maybe kids. Less time to play games.
    - Given the choice, people who play games such as WoW probably wouldn't play your games even if they were free because the time they have for gaming will all get used by WoW/etc.

  45. Yeah right... by ilsaloving · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's all the pirates fault, and has nothing to do with buggy games and utterly obnoxious DRM.

    I refuse to buy Ubisoft stuff because I refuse to jump through their nonsensical hoops. Meanwhile, I've spent more money on Steam than I have my entire life before. The prices are far more reasonable, they back up my game data, and if I switch platforms I don't have to re-buy the game again. The value I get out of steam is absolutely immense.

    Now say it with me:
    You give me value, I give you money.
    If you give me what only you perceive to be value, along with a ginormous stick to whack me over the head with, I give you my middle finger.

    See how this works?

    1. Re:Yeah right... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. You think you've earned the right to steal. I wonder if you go to Safeway and the guy behind the counter is a little rude so you shoplift a candy bar on the way out.

  46. Inverted Y Axis by AdamJS · · Score: 1

    Tell me, does this stem from you have played a lot of space sims/Joystick games?
    Just curious.

    1. Re:Inverted Y Axis by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      No I'm just an older gamer. I don't remember such a thing as "non-inverted Y axis" in the first few 3D games.

      Gamepad gamers might not fully understand this, but when you play with a mouse, inverted Y axis also follows your body's movement. By pushing the mouse north you're moving your body forward which makes you, if you don't move your head or body, look downward. By pulling your mouse south your vision goes upward. Of course, I do move my body and head while playing to compensate and look at the monitor, but the inverted Y axis feels more natural when using a mouse.

    2. Re:Inverted Y Axis by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 1

      In my case, I'm sure simulated flight has a lot to do with it. But what people now thing of as "inverted" is actually the original way around - the first FPS games that supported mouselook like Duke 3D did things this way round.

      It makes sense. Imagine your hand on the mouse is actually on the top of the head of your gaming avatar. You push the hand forward, he looks down. You pull back, he looks up.

      And you get to use the same reflex arcs for flight simulation - what's not to like?

    3. Re:Inverted Y Axis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Me too. Can't play any sort of FPS/TPS without inverted Y axis now. I did use to play lots of space/flight sims (where is the morden X-Wing damn it!). For me in FPS back is up and forward is down. Seems totally natural.

    4. Re:Inverted Y Axis by AdamJS · · Score: 1

      I used to play inverted, but one day everything just...flipped. It just instantly seemed, well, not wrong, but just completely uncomfortable and foreign. I honestly can't say why.

      I asked because I always played inverted because the first real 3D games I had played, flight sims, were inverted joystick and mouse controls.

    5. Re:Inverted Y Axis by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      Do you play a lot of games on consoles? By default, most games on Xbox and Playstation don't invert the Y axis, so maybe when you say at a computer again your mind had already made the switch without you realizing it?

    6. Re:Inverted Y Axis by AdamJS · · Score: 1

      Started on computer, then played on consoles an astronomically higher amount of time, in multiple genres including FPS games and such.

      And one day, playing an FPS I always played inverted (I'd yet to see one that didn't off inversion), I just (more or less instantly) stopped being able to play proficiently with inverted controls, where I had always previously been unable to play with "Normal".

    7. Re:Inverted Y Axis by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Gamepad gamers might not fully understand this,

      Oh some of us do, since inverted Y was standard with some of the Atari 2600's space shooters ages ago. I always invert Y (and many console games invert Y by default, thank goodness)

  47. Frog boiling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    SecurRom 1.0 was less restrictive than SecurRom 2.0. And so on up to 7.0 which Ubisoft used, IIRC. Online activation and limited installs are bound together: you can't limit installs without having online activation.

    What's to say Steam 2.0 won't have online activation.

    1. Re:Frog boiling by RogueyWon · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Steam's been around since... what... 2004? Its DRM requirements have not gotten any more restrictive over that span. In fact, the "play offline" feature works much better and more consistently than it used to, so if anything it's become less restrictive.

    2. Re:Frog boiling by heathen_01 · · Score: 0

      Steam offline is a great feature until the game you're playing asks you to insert the Disc!

    3. Re:Frog boiling by Bucky24 · · Score: 1

      What game were you trying this with? (I want to know so I can avoid it!)

      --
      All the world's a CPU, and all the men and women merely AI agents
    4. Re:Frog boiling by makomk · · Score: 1

      Actually, the DRM on Valve titles has become more restrictive over the years. Portal 2 in particular is obnoxious - it has DRM that prevented the game from running for many users when it was first released, isn't compatible with Linux or certain anti-virus software, randomly breaks playing offline, and is designed to quietly render the game impossible to complete if it thinks you're trying to bypass it. (I'm pretty sure I somehow managed to trip that last one on my legally-obtained, uncracked and unmodified copy.)

    5. Re:Frog boiling by cela0811 · · Score: 1

      I never ran into any of those issues. The only problem I had was when Portal 2 crashed at the main menu. I fixed that, and it hasn't bugged me since.

  48. Dear Ubisoft by AdamJS · · Score: 1

    I don't want your god damned FTP CoD-bomination Ghost Recon.

    I want the original, tactical, slow paced and stressing Rainbow 6 clone.

    1. Re:Dear Ubisoft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember the good old day of Ghost Recon, wonderfully terrifying because you got shot by an enemy you never saw, from a far away spot you're not quite sure of.

  49. Piracy is not the reason, it's the excuse by guises · · Score: 1

    Look past the rhetoric for a moment - 90% of the comments here are going to be pointing out that people don't buy Ubi games for other reasons, or that piracy doesn't account for lost sales to the degree that they're saying, or that this or that DRM is better. Just stop and think about what's going on for a moment: piracy is common on the PC. Prior to the internet it was an issue but not a showstopper, easy file distribution has made it much more pervasive. We can all agree, at least, that piracy is prevalent, whether or not you agree that it is a problem. We can also all agree, I hope, that piracy via internet distribution ignores software DRM, games are cracked and uploaded within hours. Only hardware DRM (consoles) has shown itself to be an effective deterrent.

    Okay, so that's the setup. Now let's assume that management at Ubi is not stupid. It's hard, the impulse is to think that these people are being honest when they blame piracy for this sort of behavior - they just can't put together the above reasoning for themselves and if only someone would talk to them and show them that their draconian DRM isn't helping and is, in fact, driving away the vocal minority... No. They're not stupid, they know this. So now we have to speculate: what are they really doing?

    One possibility is that while their DRM doesn't effect the bulk of people who do their pirating via the internet, it may deter the old style of piracy - passing the disc to your friend. That's the most generous interpretation that I can think of but it seems improbable, local piracy is a tiny fraction of the total. Another far more likely possibility is that it's there to keep you from giving the game to your friend or selling it used. A few high-ups in the industry have come out against used sales but that generates a lot of heat from the public, people get angry when you tell them what they can and can't do with their stuff, so piracy works as a convenient excuse to suppress the used games market. A third possibility is that they're styling themselves after Blizzard with Diablo 3: it's not about piracy or used sales, it's about controlling those people who purchased the game - ensuring an ongoing revenue stream through an in-game store by preventing them from installing mods or tampering with the market that they've set up.

    Now, given all that, why are they taking their ball and going home? I'm guessing that they aren't. This is a publicity stunt and they'll be back to releasing PC games in the future, only they're hoping that by drawing attention to it in this way they'll get less flack for their DRM. People will point and say, "Well, at least we're getting something. Damn pirates forcing poor Ubisoft to use this horrible activation scheme." In other words they're not doing this because of piracy, they're doing this to try to convince us to accept their DRM.

  50. I bet by AdamJS · · Score: 1

    That Skyrim's first major graphics mod will make it look better than anything Ubisoft releases in the next ten years.

    Hell, there's Oblivion graphic mods that make it look better than anything Ubisoft have released yet.

    1. Re:I bet by Dunbal · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Have you seen Morrowind 2011? Here, have a look.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    2. Re:I bet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From a graphical perspective that looks wonderful, but the system requirements jump through the roof and I also severely dislike the fact that he also added trees and vegetation to bits of the island that are supposed to be arid. The flavour and mood of the scenery of Morrowind was well designed and well balanced, and I find that any change to that sort of makes it worse.

  51. And nothing of value was lost! by kupekhaize · · Score: 1

    Ubisoft is the company known for the worst DRM in the world. I've had so many of their games become virtually unplayable due to the DRM. I refuse to buy any of their games any more, period. They can blame piracy all they want, but the fact is, I know a lot of people that are now intentionally boycotting their products.

    In order to "recover" from their image, they kept touting this game or that game that are shipped DRM free -- frankly, we don't care. We've been screwed by you guys far, far too often to trust anything you release. It doesn't matter to me that they come out with an occasional DRM free game. The company's ethos is corrupt, and frankly, I don't have any intention of buying anything from them in the future.

    P.S. My list of games on Steam is over 140 *paid* titles. I buy lots and lots of games. Just nothing from UBIsoft any more. *NOTHING*.

    --
    One of these days i'm going to find this 'peer' guy and reset HIS connection!
  52. No Market for Bad Publishers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    LoL@Ubisoft that continues to act like pirates are costing them money, instead of the realization it's bad console ports that are costing them sales. If the games were actually good, and a million people pirated the game (people that would never have bought it in the first place), then a million "word of mouth" gamers would cause their sales to go through the roof.

    But alas, the million pirates all play the game for an 30 mins to and hour and realize what a pile of crap the ports are, then not only delete the game but spread the word how horrible the games were.

    In essence, pirating is killing UbiSoft ... and in essence it's a lost revenue issue ... but it's not the lost revenue from the pirates directly ... it's the lost revenue from the negative word of mouth.

    Plus the fact that people like me, who has bought 3 video games in as many months will NEVER buy a game by Ubisoft due to their DRM ... period. So Ubisoft might as well stop publishing PC games cause there is "no market for bad publishers".

  53. Fuck Them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who the Hell would want to download a Ubisoft game??? Bug-ridden crap.

  54. Where are the cool people of game industry? by I'm+Not+There+(1956) · · Score: 1

    I used to love not only computer games, but also those "cool" people who made it. It no longer feels like that. Where are they?

    --
    "If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it's still a foolish thing."
  55. Re:Is there any data to back up whining about pira by Superken7 · · Score: 1

    I honestly would like to see how much console games sell vs PC games. Saying how much of that is due to piracy, I'm afraid, is impossible unless you come up with a model which is better than the download=lost sale model, which is absurdly broken. I know vgchartz isn't a very reliable source, but according to that site, the super-top-selling game franchise CoD sells 20M. This is a non-trivial delta. Now, maybe Steam accounts for most downloads and those don't show up in vgchartz. I honestly don't know. As I said, I would like to see some real data about sales of PC vs console. But given the a-priori data I am seeing, I would not be surprised to see that the PC has, in fact, become a very different gamer audience.

  56. DRM scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ubisoft is a company that makes me sad. They did some really nice games but their *awful* DRM scheme has convinced me not to buy any of their games anymore. I am far from being an anti-DRM extremist but they have gone such lengths that it is beyond what is tolerable. As far as i am concerned they will not get any of my money anymore. Oh, and last time i pirated anything must have been over a decade ago. I feel sorry for you, Ubisoft.

  57. Re:Is there any data to back up whining about pira by Superken7 · · Score: 1

    I honestly would like to see how much console games sell vs PC games. Saying how much of that is due to piracy, I'm afraid, is impossible unless you come up with a model which is better than the download=lost sale model, which is absurdly broken.

    I know vgchartz isn't a very reliable source, but according to that site, the super-top-selling game franchise CoD sells 20M. This is a non-trivial delta.
    Now, maybe Steam accounts for most downloads and those don't show up in vgchartz. I honestly don't know. As I said, I would like to see some real data about sales of PC vs console. But given the a-priori data I am seeing, I would not be surprised to see that the PC has, in fact, become a very different gamer audience.

    (sorry, last post got corrupted due to the use of > and HTML being on)

  58. If Ubisoft only knew... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everything that I have ever read about these guys is that they are incredibly paranoid and not well informed. The funny thing about these games is that they are saying 95% of their audience are thieves who didn't pay for their games. Well, if Ubisoft only knew exactly how HUGE the 360/ps3 pirating scene is they would probably go jump off a cliff in a hurry. Any banned Xbox immediately gets sold/turned into a modded console so that it can play burned/pirated games. It's incredibly easy to do and I have countless friends, a lot of whom are financially sound, that use these to play games. And, since they don't connect to the internet with these systems game companies have no way to find out about it as there isn't going to be anything that phones home.

    If proper research was done to see how many console games are pirated Ubisoft and other companies would most likely stop caring about pirating on the PC.

  59. Let's assume it's true... by rsilvergun · · Score: 3, Interesting

    if that's the case, the question I have is why? 95% of computer users do not have the skills needed to pirate a video game. You have to download and install bit torrent, go to one of the sites, wade though the viruses and dead files, download & burn the game, install the game, open and read the install how to (which often has to be opened manually in a text editor), and follow the instructions.

    Someone who can do all that is a very advanced computer users (don't laugh, I'm talking about the aggregate whole of all users). Assuming that Ubisoft's figures are correct, the only people left playing PC games are highly advanced users. If we assume this is true, then I want to ask why. Two possibilities are:

    1. The technical barrier to entry for PC gaming is too high. If we assume that to play PC games you need to install a new graphics card (not an unreasonable assumption: most games come with an Intel Graphics adapter that can barely run WoW) then this could be true.

    2. All non-Technical PC gamers have jumped ship to consoles or MMORPGs (the WoW effect).

    Regarding # 1, there are still millions of PCs being sold with entry level ATI & nVidia graphics, which is more than enough to play games. That wasn't true 10 years ago, but the state of PC graphics has been stalled by console porting. Regarding # 2, well, there's something to that. But I would argue it's the job of Ubisoft's PC marketing team to make these people want to play games, and they're not doing a very good job. Note that I'm not talking about the game studios themselves, but the marketers. The key to marketing is to make people want to do something they didn't want to do before. Not necessarily something they'd never do, but something they would be disposed to doing given the proper message / incentives.

    I guess what it sounds like to me is this: Ubisoft is just throwing up their hands and giving up.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Let's assume it's true... by msobkow · · Score: 1

      No kidding. The average gamer doesn't know how to download pirated games in the first place.

      I read this as Ubisoft saying "We don't like the PC market, it's too small. But we can't piss everyone off by telling them that, so we'll blame piracy. Again."

      I mean, seriously, some thousands of people pirate a game so you skip the revenue from millions?

      Yeah, that's a rational business decision.

      --
      I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    2. Re:Let's assume it's true... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if that's the case, the question I have is why? 95% of computer users do not have the skills needed to pirate a video game. You have to download and install bit torrent, go to one of the sites, wade though the viruses and dead files, download & burn the game, install the game, open and read the install how to (which often has to be opened manually in a text editor), and follow the instructions.

      Someone who can do all that is a very advanced computer users (don't laugh, I'm talking about the aggregate whole of all users). Assuming that Ubisoft's figures are correct, the only people left playing PC games are highly advanced users. If we assume this is true, then I want to ask why. Two possibilities are:

      1. The technical barrier to entry for PC gaming is too high. If we assume that to play PC games you need to install a new graphics card (not an unreasonable assumption: most games come with an Intel Graphics adapter that can barely run WoW) then this could be true.

      2. All non-Technical PC gamers have jumped ship to consoles or MMORPGs (the WoW effect).

      Regarding # 1, there are still millions of PCs being sold with entry level ATI & nVidia graphics, which is more than enough to play games. That wasn't true 10 years ago, but the state of PC graphics has been stalled by console porting. Regarding # 2, well, there's something to that. But I would argue it's the job of Ubisoft's PC marketing team to make these people want to play games, and they're not doing a very good job. Note that I'm not talking about the game studios themselves, but the marketers. The key to marketing is to make people want to do something they didn't want to do before. Not necessarily something they'd never do, but something they would be disposed to doing given the proper message / incentives.

      I guess what it sounds like to me is this: Ubisoft is just throwing up their hands and giving up.

      So true... But lets keep PC technical for our sake ok! We don't want any stupid kids over here.

    3. Re:Let's assume it's true... by Nysul · · Score: 1

      Ubisoft's PC series that are not ports are the Settlers and Anno series, which are high strategic real-time city-building games that SimCity abandoned long ago because they realized there is no market. That demographic probably is mainly advanced users.

      That being said, I hope Ubisoft does not give up on those series, as those are my favorite types of games. I have every Anno game despite the incredibly shitty DRM.If Ubisoft gets out of this market the only thing left of the genre is Tropico, which isn't doing so well as 4 was just a psuedo-expansion of 3 and didn't even add new music.

  60. PC ports of console games? by pinkeen · · Score: 1

    There's a bigger issue: why the fuck is everybody porting console games to PC?

    Where did the cutting edge go?

    I look at graphics comparisons of X360 vs PS3 vs PC and you know what? They look almost the same. Sure, you have better resolution, slightly more detailed textures, more FPS on PC, but what the fuck? Consoles have 2005-era hardware. PC games should be crushing console games in terms of graphics.
    What the fuck has happened?

    Sorry for the f's - but this thing boggles my mind to the point my head nearly explodes.

    1. Re:PC ports of console games? by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Simple. Consoles are what caused this, which is why for most games the first thing that you see released are higher res. texture packs for games.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    2. Re:PC ports of console games? by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      We've reached one of those points of diminishing returns some might call "good enough" and most people simply aren't willing to pay more money for a PC even if they have it, because all they do is Facebook and Angry Birds so you see a lot of boxes with Nvidia 6150SE's and the like.

  61. Why do they need more than 2 years copyright by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why do they need more than 2 years copyright, then?

    1. Re:Why do they need more than 2 years copyright by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I don't think they do. Even the publishers readily admit most sales are made within two weeks.

    2. Re:Why do they need more than 2 years copyright by dyingtolive · · Score: 2

      God, I wish I hadn't already posted so I could mod this up.

      --
      Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
    3. Re:Why do they need more than 2 years copyright by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To prevent anyone spending time on something they can't get paid for.

  62. Pirating? Well, more like consumers catching on. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Dear Ubisoft, allow me to make this an open letter. To be copied as anyone sees fit.

    You claim that it's "piracy" (I'll use the term as loosely here as you do) is the reason you do not sell your games. And hey, I won't even doubt that. But let's ask for a moment, why do people copy your games rather than buy them? Is it because of the monetary incentive? Sure, for some it is. Or is it because it's simply the smarter decision?

    Let's be blunt and honest here: Buying an UBIsoft game is, in a word, stupid. Simple as that. I was lucky to avoid this mistake in the more recent past when you went completely nuts with the crippling of your content, but I had to see friends suffer at your hand. Buying content for quite a bit of money that simply doesn't work. Because the game was flawed? Because it had bugs? Because it wasn't compatible with some piece of hardware? Because of any other reason we've seen in the past? No. Because you deliberately introduced some part that made it flawed and that made it cease to work at random. Be it because of copy protection that simply freaks out and trashes parts of the system, be it because of the harebrained idea that even for a single player game a constant (and stable) connection to you is required or be it for all the other not so understandable reasons, all in the name of the holy DRM.

    And here's the big difference to the game crashes of the old days, the crashes that were due to bugs and incompatibilities: They didn't happen in cracked versions. In a cracked version, all the artificially introduced crashing reasons were fixed. I use that term in the usual sense of the computer world. They were repaired. At least from the user's point of view, this was actually a bugfix. It removed a bug that kept them from playing.

    This was actually the first time where removing the DRM had a direct and positive influence on the playability of a game. Yes, earlier DRM mechanisms also crapped out from time to time, but in general, cracked versions proved to be less stable and more prone to problems, if no later than with the next patch. This was the introduction of DRM that had a serious impact, not on some but on many customers, who could instantly see how not buying but copying that game removes all the problems they have.

    Then why does this surface now? Because it took people a while to notice it. You could easily sell a few titles with this kind of copy protection before the majority of your customers was pissed and before the majority was looking for a cure of the problem. Cracking and copying hasn't been a widespread problem for people who don't care about money 'til now. And even in these times, people do spend money on leisure activities and on entertainment, they actually do buy games. Just not YOUR games anymore. Now, I can't vouch for them copying those games, but answer me one question: Would you drop 50+ bucks on something from a company that has proven to you that buying their stuff nets you frustration instead of entertainment? Many of these people who did buy your games learned that they're better off not buying them, that copying your games is pretty much the only way to get the experience they were looking for. Not because of the money, not because they want to "stick it to da man", not because it's cool or fancy, simply because you don't deliver what the cracked version does: A game that works.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  63. 95%? Really? by Japher · · Score: 1

    How long before we have " I am the 95%" protests?

  64. Not losing any sleep over this. by flimflammer · · Score: 1

    Ubisoft games have been almost universally crap lately anyway. Gone are the days of things like the Prince of Persia: Sands of Time games or even the original Assasin's Creed. Instead they just rehash the same thing that did moderately well umpteen times (later PoP games, Assasin's Creed, etc). Don't get me started on EA/Activision with Call of Duty and Battlefield but that's another topic altogether.

    I used to be a pretty big fan of Ubisoft. They've lost my favor with their aggressive DRM and lack of originality.

    Not that they care about my opinion, but my opinion is starting to become the norm. Ubisoft should stay on consoles. It's where they belong now. I'm not losing any sleep over it.

  65. I don't believe in man made global warming, but... by p51d007 · · Score: 1

    2-4 degrees (f) doesn't seem like a lot, but remember how you feel when your body temperature goes from (f) 98.6, to 101

  66. Lazy Ports Suck. by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    What is actually happening here is developers develop for a console. The console's technology by its standardization will be 5+ years old. You then port said game to a PC using not only current technology, but technology that was quite a bit better even 5+ years ago. A combination of the fact of designing for the lowest common denominator, along with controls being ported from a simplistic controller, and doing so as an afterthought, and you get a game that is a steaming pile of crap. Now add a healthy dose of crippling DRM to totally destroy what little marketing value you had left. Now act surprised when you charge 70$ for the title in store for a mature PC market, and they turn out in droves to not buy it. Likely much of the "pirating" are people downloading it to see what a POS it is before deciding to spend their hard earned cash on your steaming pile of garbage. Now say you are getting out of "PC development" due to piracy. Sorry, you moved to console development a long time ago at the expense of PC development. If you want your argument to hold any water, develop the PC version first and port it to consoles, otherwise shut the hell up. Piracy's fault indeed.

  67. Story's already changed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Story has already changed by the time it was posted to slashdot.

    http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2011/11/25/i-am-alive-might-yet-be-alive-on-pc

  68. Just to spite UBISOFT... by Anarchduke · · Score: 1

    We need to get a volunteer team of skilled programmers to pirate and port their non-PC games to the PC. Yes I know the games suck, but it would be fun to release out into the PC-gaming world a UBISOFT title that wasn't sold to PC's because of the "piracy".

    --
    who prays for Satan? Who in 18 centuries has had the humanity to pray for the 1 sinner that needed it most? ~Mark Twain
  69. I still got a HUGE stack of CD with games by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    I got a stack of CD's somewhere of all the games I bought, it is about a meter high. Just the CD's, no cases. I threw the big box of floppies away. 3.5 inch mostly, I am not THAT old... yes... I also had tapes once... guess I am that old.

    Anyway, I once bought games. Like say... Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe by a company called LucasGames. Heard of them? It came with a book you could kill a fairly large spider with. X-wing? Came with a pamflet. Later CD games? PDF on the CD.

    There used to be a time you got maps, maybe a thin figure, stickers, a MANUAL. Something IN the box. They stopped doing that and then stopped giving you a box. Saved space on the shelve... yes it did. Do you know how I save even more space? By downloading.

    There used to be a time when games were FINISHED when you downloaded them and they had WEEKS of gameplay. Take X-Wing, there was no way you could complete it. And when you were ready for more after say half a year, there was an expansion pack with a complete new campaign and a new plane. It had WEIGHT.

    Nowadays? Oblivion and the horse armour... Dragon Age and the gift pack. Just a few dialog lines extra for 5 bucks...

    If you courted your girlfriend and had sex with her, then a dinner for a blowjob is an okay deal. But if she then expects after all that courting she demands a diamond ring in exchange for a link to her pics online so you can go whack off, you feel a bit cheated.

    Here are some recent games I downloaded and STILL wanted my money back:

    Driver San Francisco. My god, have you EVER heard of a difficulty mode? And how about the option to skip some stuff. Non-linear my ass. A hub in which you got to all the sub-hubs is not non-linear. I don't enjoy timed races where it is obvious the driver who set the time had a better setup then me and better reflexes (I will get to this later if you are still reading this)

    Skyrim. Can the interface be any more pathetic? Is it possible to have any lower res textures? Can game designers FINALLY start coding for machine with more then 2gb of memory as in 64 bit?

    Remember the bit about the reflexes? What are most of the pirated games aimed at? EA does just FINE with The Sims. MAYBE Ubisoft shouldn't make so many testosterone filled teenage boy games and aim their games at a more mature audience. I still play games AND I can easily afford them. Special edition for an extra hundred (if it is available, Skyrim special edition didn't go on sale in Holland), I lap it up. I got the money you want. But I am not interested in yet another dystopian FPS.

    It is very easy to blame piracy but there are two reasons people pirate. Because they can't afford your game or because the game doesn't interest them enough to buy it. I often fall in the last class. Driver I played for maybe two hours and then gave up. Nice enough but clearly not aimed at my old ass. So, I don't buy it, just play the extended demo courtesy of the pirate bay for a laugh.

    Get some good, fully made for the PC games out and not aimed at 12yr old boys and you will make it big. Ask EA.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  70. ahh, piracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nobody can steal it if you don't make it. But nobody can buy it either.

  71. Hey Ubisoft! Your games aren't worth it. by slashdotjunker · · Score: 1

    There are some ethical considerations regarding piracy and intellectual property that are fun and interesting to talk about. However, looking at it pragmatically, Ubisoft games are just poor value for the consumer. They price their games at the same price as their competitors, but package the game with always-on DRM. The consumer is getting less for their money and have taken their business elsewhere.

    If Ubisoft really wants to have always-on DRM, when none of their competitors have it, then they will have to either lower the price or create the greatest games in the world. You can't expect to be successful when you're selling an inferior product in a crowded marketplace. Furthermore, at the same time, they are aggravating their customers by starting a public morality debate (that nobody really wanted to have) and taking a hard-line stance that is generally the opposite of how their customers feel (according to their own quotes).

    In short, Ubisoft's PC games division has shown poor business-sense and poor customer relations. It was only a matter of time until they failed utterly.

  72. Fuck you by Osgeld · · Score: 1

    I wont buy your shit anyway, if its not choked with DRM it barley fucking functions anyway

  73. Work WITH Us! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    UbiSoft needs to take a lesson from the Music industry and work with the game community rather than against it.
    Release their games DRM free and with 'good' control schemes etc for their PC edition, and we'll support them
    It's proven that if you treat your customers like criminals? They'll act like it. If you treat them as human beings
    with respect and understanding? They'll show the same back.

  74. Well three things there slick by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Informative

    The big one is something another posted pointed out: Those are retail only sales. A lot of people on PC buy their games via digital download these days. Just ask Gabe Newell about that, he has gotten exceedingly rich off of that, and Steam isn't the only DD service. In particular, Skyrim probably sold a ton digital since it is a Steamworks game (meaning it needs Steam to play). Might as well get it on Steam, since that's what the retail copy uses anyhow. Skyrim peaked at more than 300,000 people playing it AT ONE TIME on Steam, so I'm going to guess more than 500k copies for the PC sold.

    The other is that total numbers don't matter, it only matters that you make enough to justify the cost. After all if we went by your metric of "total numbers after 1 week of sales" then there should be no Skyrim for PS3. The 260 sold twice as many copies, so that should be the only platform right?

    Nope, all that matters is you make enough to make it worth your while. So, presume PCs only did sell 500k copies. A standard retail markup is about 100%. It might be less for software, I don't know, but we'll assume 100% markup. That means Bethesda made $15 million on Skyrim for the PC so far. So long as their porting costs were a non-trivial amount below that amount, it was worth doing. If they spent $5 million on the PC version (which is unlikely it was most likely much less) then that is $10 million they walked away with already.

    Then there's the fact that, no, PC are NOT more expensive to develop for. One big reason is licensing fees. Consoles take a cut, a non-trivial one, of every game you sell for licensing fees. It is how the companies make money. So $5-10 of every single copy sold goes to MS or Sony for the console versions. No such issue on the PC. You keep 100% of the profits.

    Also porting from the PC to the 360 is quite easy. MS has seen to that. It isn't quite as simple as clicking "cross compile" but close. MS wants games on both platforms, and they make the tools to do it. The tools are also the same (Visual Studio) in both cases.

    A more minor fact, but still one that matters too, is that digital distributors charge less than retail stores. Their markup is more like 25-30%. So for all the copies you sell there, you get even more money per sale.

    This idea that the PC just isn't worth it is silly, and not backed up by reality. If it weren't, the why the hell are there so many PC games? Go to Metacritic and ask it for a list of releases for the PC. Have a look at the massive list in recent months. You think companies would keep doing it if there was no profit in it?

    This is Ubisoft whining. Even they still do not just PC releases, but PC exclusives. They just released Anno 2070, a PC only strategy game. There is no console version, nor is there one planned (not the kind of game that would play well with a controller). Again, you think they'd do that if there was no money?

    1. Re:Well three things there slick by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Hwre's a question I have, why buy the game from Steam rather than an actual store? You have two options:

      1. Go to store, buy game, be playing almost immediately.
      2. Download game from Steam, It's a BIG game, in the time that would take you could do #1 easy.

    2. Re:Well three things there slick by Xayma · · Score: 1

      If you purchase before the release date many steam games allow you to download the game before hand in an encrypted format. At the designated release time, the keys are distributed and the game finishes installing. So you can often play it quicker than if you were to go to the store (though your point is valid for games that aren't a new release but are readily available in a store).

    3. Re:Well three things there slick by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

      Price aside (Steam loves sales) there are multiple reasons:

      1) Laziness. That's a big one. Steam lets you buy a game at home, with no effort. You just click purchase and that's it. You don't need to go anywhere, hell you don't need to even have pants on.

      2) Ease of reinstallation. You don't have to keep track of media, you just install Steam and you can download the game any time you like. You can do it even away from home, just log your laptop in to Steam and get your game.

      3) Total cost. No sales tax on Steam, but also consider that it isn't free to drive your car or take the bus somewhere. Drive to a store 10 miles away in a car that gets 20 MPG in the city and you spend $3+ just on fuel.

      4) Availability. Steam's entire catalogue is always available for sale, as is any other digital service out there (they don't all carry the same games). Nothing is ever out of stock and there's no shelf space limit so they carry even old and less popular titles. Stores can only stock a limited amount of stuff.

      However, let's talk speed as well. Really, with fast Internet, it is often faster. When you buy a game on Steam, the download starts right then. So presume you have 20mbps Internet, which is not uncommon these days, and you are installing an 8GB (1 dual layer DVD) game. That will take about 55 minutes to download, after which you can play right away, it'll be fully patched.

      Can you beat that going to the store? Going to be rather tough. Even if you presume you live right by a store, as I do, I doubt you'll get there in less than 10 minutes. It takes that long to get your stuff together, get to your car, drive over, park, and all that. That is for a store I can see from my balcony. I usually just walk which takes longer but we are talking speed here. I think 20+ minutes is more reasonable for most people. It takes me 20-30 minutes to get to the next closest store that sells computer games.

      You then have to go and find the game and buy it. If speed is the issue you also need to not get distracted and look around. In the Target I shop at, I can probably get the game and pay for it in 10 minutes, if it isn't busy. Then it is back home.

      So you are at 30ish minutes, even in my ideal situation of living right next to a mall, and probably closer to an hour for anyone else. You aren't done yet though, you have to install it. Data transfers off a DVD faster than 20mbps but not as much as you'd think. Around 80mbps (10 megabytes per second) is the fastest I usually see. So 14 minutes to install the game.

      Not done yet though, you need to check for and download any patches out there. If you are lucky, they are small and come in quickly. However you can find multi-GB patches these days.

      Ok well even assuming no patch you've got 10+10+10+14 = 44 minutes. In my near ideal situation I save maybe 11 minutes, and that is presuming I don't screw around, or I don't walk to Target, and so on. For most people it is probably more like 30+10+30+14 = 84 minutes.

      Also in my particular case I have a 50mbps line so games come down really fast.

      Digital downloads just don't take as long as you might think.

    4. Re:Well three things there slick by z3ronl · · Score: 1

      You still using dial-up?

    5. Re:Well three things there slick by Stiletto · · Score: 1

      The only downside I can see is, if one day Steam decides to not let you access/play your library of games, you're screwed. It's a big downside, although who knows what the probability is that that will happen?

    6. Re:Well three things there slick by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      No, 15Mbps cable, with a recent bandwidth cap, but even I don't want to take the time to download a formerly disc based title from PSN, when I can have the disc version faster. Heck if I could get Fedora DVD's faster from a local store than I could get a download I'd get the physical disks and NOT download from the Fedora site.

    7. Re:Well three things there slick by Xest · · Score: 1

      Well if you what you say is true- that digital sales massively increase profits, that the PC isn't more expensive to develop for, and that this is just Ubisoft whining. Then why have so many other studios ditched the PC? Why are so many of today's total AAA titles not ended up on the PC? Why would these companies turn down the chance to make so much more profit on a title?

      As I pointed to in my post, even ignoring the figures these firms have decided the PC is unprofitable regardless - and they've done this based on the resultant profits they gain from sales - obviously they've deemed these aren't enough to make the PC worthwhile.

      Short of stupid conspiracy theories I see little reason why else companies would have abandoned the platform for their AAA titles.

      Or are the PC zealots now going to start claiming companies haven't abandoned the platform? If so I can gladly list a few hundred games over the last few years that were high budget, million+ selling, but haven't ever ended up on the PC.

  75. Skyrim by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the same reason Skyrim did so poorly and was a huge disaster for Bethesda.

    What? It sold 3 million units in a week, most of them PC?

    Odd. Maybe Ubisoft just isn't making games worth paying for?

  76. No kidding by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 3, Informative

    I skipped Assassin's Creed 2 because of the DRM. I didn't pirate it, just didn't play it. I don't lack for good games to play (I have a backlog of games, damn Steam sales) and I wasn't going to put up with always on DRM so I gave it a miss.

    Looking to be the same thing for Anno 2070. Sounds like it is really well done and I like the Anno series but it uses a TAGES 3 machine activation deal. Well I'm not ok with that. Not that I want it on more than 3 computers, but that it only gives you 3 installs total, with no revocation. I'd eat that up easy, as I reinstall my system a minimum of each new Windows version, and usually more often because of new hardware.

    So I'll probably have to give it a miss too. Too bad, I would have liked to play it but if they want to be dicks there is no lack of other companies that aren't who are waiting to take my money. Never mind the games I have a backlog of now (meaning I own but haven't yet played) I have a list of 10 other games I'd really like to get, but haven't because I have this backlog to play.

  77. That $10 console fee is really by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    just going to the console manufacturers. On the PC you keep a lot more of your profits. Console makers generally take 30% off the top. If they could get away with it they'd raise the price for the console version higher. Yes, I realize steam takes a cut, but it's in line with the mark up from a retailer. I've heard from some of the indies it's less.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:That $10 console fee is really by dissy · · Score: 0

      just going to the console manufacturers. On the PC you keep a lot more of your profits. Console makers generally take 30% off the top. If they could get away with it they'd raise the price for the console version higher. Yes, I realize steam takes a cut, but it's in line with the mark up from a retailer. I've heard from some of the indies it's less.

      The advantage to PC distribution is that you get a choice.

      To sell on a console, as you say you must pay them their fee to do so.

      To sell on a PC, you must do nothing.
      You can choose to use Steam, and pay them a fee to handle distribution and some marketing.
      You can also choose not to, and do all of that yourself.

      There is no reason you can't choose to setup a website, provide a download, and handle your own "cd key" generation or whatever you want. You can even choose not to use DRM, another choice you are not given on the console market.

      Likewise you can choose to do all of your marketing and advertising yourself.

      One can argue if Steam provides more worth in marketing, advertising, and distribution, than they take in fees.
      But you get to have that argument. You can run the numbers and choose which ever option is better for you.

      (Those companies who already have a name for themselves and some games released, likely have the infrastructure in place to distribute it, and already have a marketing team. Fresh startups on their first game likely have none of that and so Steam can be more cost effective)

      In the console world, you don't get to choose.
      You must pay that consoles fees to even release your game. Then you must pay them for distribution (Be it on disc or downloadable.)
      They generally do not provide any marketing at all, which means you must pay for that too.
      A startup just doesn't have a chance.

    2. Re:That $10 console fee is really by ewanm89 · · Score: 1

      It's a lot less, but that doesn't stop EA complaining about it on steam but be perfectly willing to pay M$ and Sony.

    3. Re:That $10 console fee is really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Steam takes 30%

  78. I think the problems is by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    that the pirated copies generate support costs that are hard to distinguish from legitimate customers. If someone emails you for support it can be hard to tell their fraudulent. I've read several of the indie guys complaining that they're servers & support forums get hammered by people they know pirated the game, but that it's not technically feasible to filter them out without lots & lots of false positives (which generate really nasty support calls).

    As for the 95% figure, it's probably an exaggeration, but if you're wondering where they get figures from it'd be easy for them to make a guess based on the # of pirated copies being played online. The numbers would be off some (for the aforementioned false positives), but they'd be accurate enough for sales projections after a few years of data...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  79. "stop your filthy whining you festering piece ..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My biggest mistake was buying a Ubisoft game for my brothers PC! It cost me two weekends to nuke and restore to working order once we discovered the fault was their cruddy DRM! They can't go out of business fast enough to suit me...

  80. Why not 2 yrs for movies, book, and music also? by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    I would bet that practically all the revenue that is taken in for most movies, books, and music; is taken in within the first two years - certainly within five years.

  81. Tell you what, Stanislas & Ubi... by He+Who+Has+No+Name · · Score: 1

    You can suck my cock, and I can not buy your game. So there you go! You've successfully shot yourself in the foot and sucked a cock at the same time.

  82. UBI DRM keeps me from buying by sinij · · Score: 1

    I am PC-only gamer that spends significant share of my discretionary income on my gaming hobby. I would buy any game that interests me, even if I don't see myself ever spending more than couple hours playing it. I never pirate, not because I don't know how to or afraid of being caught, but because it is not convenient and my time is better spent elsewhere. I generally tolerate bugs, release day patches, driver updates and all the usual crap that comes with PC gaming. What I won't ever tolerate is DRM that a) inconveniences me by putting limitations on how/when I play b) locks some aspect of use or negatively affects performance of my PC.
    In my recent memory I skipped couple UBI titles that I'd loved to play solely due to DRM. Assassin's Creed with always online single player DRM, Might and Magic Heroes with crippled and incompatible offline mode or always online DRM.
    Don't treat me as a pirate-in-waiting and you might get my money.

  83. Crunchy Roll by Artemis3 · · Score: 1

    Talking about piracy when referring to shows aired for free on TV in a different country, and people devoting their time and effort to make quality subtitling often surpassing "professional" translation (ie Sekai no monshou/senki series) begs for silliness at best. Which is why I'm against the whole licensing thing (or cries about "stop distributing when licensed" junk).

    For starters, Japanese animation studios barely ever take count of international exposure. They want their show success in their land and is paid by advertisers there already, period.

    When someone imports a show taped from free to air tv of a foreign country, and even devotes his/her time/skills to add subtitles, for free; how can you claim "piracy"? It is unauthorised promotion at best...

    Ah, but you might hurt the clueless American licensee wanting to sell DVDs... Who acted like 3 years late to begin with, added unwanted dubbing and bad translated subtitles. Well that is your problem in your country anyway (and the Japanese can't care the less either).

    Crunchyroll is annoying. Just like that other tv show streaming thing nobody but US residents care about. Its restricted to few countries, perhaps only the US. Yet, they make appear shows are already "licensed" thus thwarting WORLD fansub distribution.

    Ok, Crunchyroll killed a few quality fansub groups; fortunately other groups (outside US) emerged and restored the situation. Since Crunchyroll is only for Americans to begin with.

    Also, and very importantly, not everyone can stream HD, or even SD in many places. It sucks with free services like youtube, I can't even imagine what someone would feel if using a paid streaming service, perhaps thru (paid) proxies to avoid that stupid US only mentality, often adding the ISP fee and the fact a foreign country with a much worse economy where every single of your dollars takes 10 times more effort to make.

    Granted, if those with licenses are going to sue people left and right for something which is not even theirs to begin with (because an absurd legal system allows them to), a service like crunchy might seem preferable (just like some people find iTunes acceptable, even tho lossless drmless content is out there...).

    However, as you can see in the many cases of shows NOT licensed (ie. not in crunchy) the torrents still beat the alternative, both in quality (720p and 1080 being common); good beyond professional translation (often including explanation for cultural differences) and availability (the day after it was aired). And, there is content you will NEVER be able to watch "legally" as the studio that made them is no more or doesn't want to license it.

    I'm sure you can somehow extrapolate this to games. As the successful Valve's strategy in Russia shows. Steam, for starters, is not restricted to the US... And being able to pay in your local currency, with prices realistically adapted to your local economy, is a must. Hence, you see movie studios selling movies in China for 3$ when the unauthorised copies go for like .5$; still reaps far more profits than drming and suing everyone to death (which they can't in a country where they can't purchase enough politicians to do their laws).

    --
    Artix
    Your Linux, your init.
  84. Heroes 6 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've purchased Heroes 6 when it launched. From day 1 the account was stuck at connecting to conflux.
    10 calls to tech support, tickets, responses like your cd key is reset, without the key being actually reset, then getting a response that I have to wait 24 hours for it being reset (why send the first response then and not after 24 hours) then finally giving them the password to my account so they can try to login with it and see what's wrong. 5 days and no other answer.
    So, I've paid ~50 euros for the deluxe online version in october and now at the end of november I can't access the online content, meaning the exact same thing the pirated game can do.
    How could I even think about purchasing another game from UBI in the future?

  85. Nobody steals Angry Birds by TheSkepticalOptimist · · Score: 1

    OK sure, I know there are people that still figure out how to hack a copy of Angry Birds onto device X, but in general the makers of Angry Birds are very rich happy people compared to the people at Ubisoft. Two big reasons why nobody steals Angry Birds. First, there are free ad-subsidized versions of the app. When its free and you only have to put up with a few ads, then why bother with the hassle of trying to hack it onto your system. I know people hate ads, but whatever, free is free and I am enough of a free thinker that I don't have to buy something just because I saw an ad in Angry Birds. Secondly the non-ad version is cheap enough that only *ssholes won't separate with a few bucks for a decent game, and nobody likes being an *sshole. I am amazed at how the main-stream gaming industry still haven't caught on to the fact that nobody wants to pay $60 for a game anymore, which is why they are stolen. The only reason why next-gen gaming consoles are not even being announced (except for the stupid WiiU) is that Microsoft and Sony do not know how to compete in a reality where people do not buy $60 games any more. Consoles are sold at a lost and the loss is made up for through platform licensing. How do you make money on a platform selling $.99 games, well, ask Google and Apple because it is possible. There is also a myth that main-stream games NEED to cost a lot of money to produce and so that is why they cost a lot of money. If your game costs millions to produce, you need to change your business model. It shouldn't cost this much to produce any software, game or otherwise. Stop making a new game engine every release and start using one of the many widely available game engines which are cheap (or even free) to license, then all you are doing is largely modeling the game, artwork, music, and other stuff which should be relatively cheap. Why are iOS/Android games cheap or free?, because they are all sharing the same gaming engines so it comes down to spending a few months developing game content, which is cheap, period. Games like Angry Birds have over half a billion downloads, the most any main-stream game company can hope for selling a main stream game is maybe 20 million. Ubisoft et. al. need to get a clue and figure out how to compete in the 21st century gaming market and stop blaming piracy which is only a byproduct of not understanding the market they are selling to. Finally, why doesn't Chrome preserve my paragraphs?

    --
    I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
    1. Re:Nobody steals Angry Birds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am amazed at how the main-stream gaming industry still haven't caught on to the fact that nobody wants to pay $60 for a game anymore, which is why they are stolen.

      http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2011/08/01
      Be careful going down this road, some people are plenty happy to pay $60 for a game they feel is worth $60. I am on the other side of the fence in saying cheap games are part in what's hurting the game economy. When you have a big-budget game (let's pretend this is from some perfect developer, like Valve but actually perfect) you expect a level of polish that can't be touched, an engaging game that hooks you for hours or days, be through single or multiplayer ways, and you expect just a general feeling of worth for the money spent.

      On the flipside you have iPhone games, which are sold for about $1-$4, and offer hours of entertainment (some only minutes, but ignore these). These games are easily to ingest, easy to play, and easy to justify spending less than a fiver on. The problem this has brought about is now people are beginning to think certain games "aren't worth" the money they charge for it. Not every game is worth $60, but then again the price of these games hasn't been going up constantly (I remember they stepped from $50 to $60 as the standard a while back) and so usually the amount of time you get out of the game and just the sheer amount of polish more than justifies it's price. I don't remember buying my own NES games but the Nintendo Powers and numbers at the Toys 'R Us counters led me to believe/remember games were being sold for $70-$90!

      There is also a myth that main-stream games NEED to cost a lot of money to produce and so that is why they cost a lot of money. If your game costs millions to produce, you need to change your business model. It shouldn't cost this much to produce any software, game or otherwise.

      I'm going to play devil's advocate and point out some of the big-name games that probably do need all that money. As ridiculous as it is some games are developing new technology just to make their game run, then they hire a bunch of the best animators and sound guys to flesh it out, then you have to pay for the voice talent, marketing, mix in a little of overhead for those middle-management BA types and you're looking at a few million to make a game.

      Just because a good game can be made with nothing but one dev, an idea, and a will to work (Cave Story, Braid, etc) please don't try to further the thought that the _only_ games worth buying nowadays cost less than my morning coffee. Sometimes I like to play Metal Gear Solid because it does feel like I'm interacting with a Hollywood story - complete with the overpaid actors, flashy over the top scenarios, and complete lack of respect to common sense and logic.

      Finally, why doesn't Chrome preserve my paragraphs?

      I'm glad you pointed this out I was about to mention something about a brick wall.

  86. Isn't it the other way round these days? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Last I checked, it was the XBox 360 version of Skyrim that was leaked, cracked, and widely pirated before the game was even released. There were thousands of streams of people illegally playing the unreleased game on their consoles.

    The PC version? Not so much.

  87. Re:Propaganda? by Phrogman · · Score: 1

    Perhaps its more a matter of "Management has decided that we don't have the funds to support completing the game, and they are cancelling development on it". "Oh" says someone in Marketing, "can we make an announcement that its due to the level of piracy we are encountering and use that as a justification for our poor sales and raise the piracy issue again"?

    --
    "The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid
  88. Look at Blizzard by mfh · · Score: 1

    Blizzard had a promo recently where they were giving away Diablo 3 and a bunch of other ingame loot for WoW, because they are afraid of people leaving the World of Warcraft game out of sheer boredom.

    I think if you have to give a game away to keep your audience, you've got major fucking problems. Oh look, fucking ninja pandas!!! Jumping sharks!!!

    --
    The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
  89. OH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about ... Sun Spots? ... what about ... Bad Breath!

    Well, the ones doing the Privacy, IP, Copyright and Stealing,
    infriengment is UbSoft for one!

    Ha Ha Ha. Shitless wonders.

    ===

  90. Oddly enough... by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

    I was done with Ubisoft when they released Splinter Cell:Chaos Theory with that God awful Starfoce DRM.

    That shit appreciably slowed down my computer.

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  91. Haven't purchased from them since... by ShadowEFX · · Score: 1

    Ever since they used that Russian malware billed as copy protection, I haven't purchased anything from them. Of course, considering all they release are poorly done console ports it doesn't look like I've missed much.

    A general request for the game development community - please go talk with Bioware. They've, so far and with few exception anyway (I felt Mass Effect 2 suffered from some console gimpage), figured out the dual PC/console development process.

    A specific request to Ubisoft - go out of business. Please. Let the good developers working for you find jobs with decent companies.

  92. Why I don't buy so many games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I play computer games since the AMSTRAD/AMIGA era...and switched to PC in 1994. My policy has always been to get pirated copies of many games but to buy the ones I really enjoyed playing at. In that list I can recall:
    - The CIV series and generally all the Sid Meiers games (Pirates etc.)
    - Command And Conquer Series
    - Diablo I and II
    - Some plane / tanks / army sims (Arma, OFP, AH64, Abrams A1A, etc)

    Ok...now we are in 2011 and CIV 5 is out. I never really liked STEAM so I thought i was going to buy a solid copy of the game (actually I bought two solid copies to be able to play on LAN and online with my gf). Imagine my disappointment when the CIV 5 installer from the DVD asks you to install STEAM first and to create an account...

    Why I don't like STEAM : whenever I start CIV5 it launches STEAM, and many times I can't loggin, so no CIV just because the registration server at STEAM is busy or what. If there is a way to really play OFFLINE please feel free to tell me.

    Also, when you buy a digital copy of a game on STEAM you cannot resell it...what happened to the good old second hand games market ?

    Moreover : it appears that CIV 5 is extremely buggy (even patched)...I CANNOT UNDERSTAND how they can take the time to develop and release DLCs for 3.49$ and not take the bloody time to fix a 60$ game. (Or maybe the count on the DLC money to pay developers who will repair the vanilla core game?)

    So here on my desk I have to hard copies of CIV5 and guess what....We play with pirated copies from a russian website...it works fine, thank you.

  93. The Passing of Ubi by docwatson223 · · Score: 1

    Overall, I've been majorly disappointed with all of the UBISOFT games over the last 3-5 years; post the REDSTORM acquisition, they had a couple of good title runs and then just effectively died from a quality standpoint. Ubi, I will mourn your passing because at this rate it's obvious you're terminal.

  94. Serious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess this matter getting serious...