New Ubisoft PC Game DRM Requires Constant Internet - WTF

[Ausdoerrt]

A game that's crappy and nobody cares about is "unpiratable". I'm sure game companies would love to have other forms of "unpiratable" games, but "if there's a will, there's a way" is an old axiom that hasn't been disproved thus far.

The way I see it, companies are wasting precious resources to develop new DRM that they could use to make games more fun to play, and give people more incentive to buy them. The way it is now, you get games that you don't know are good or not, because they're unrentable, don't have demos, and are impractical to buy-and-resell, because of restrictive DRM. And I really can't see how this would benefit the sales.

 

[Arr0nax]

Actually, I think an unpiratable game is easy and industry is clearly heading toward it.

Recipe is simple :
-Just make the game need crucial information from a server in order to function
-Without connection to the server, game client is useless

That's basically the way MMORPG are unhackable but exported to other games, the quantity of information exchanged between server and client being trivial.

Game is unhackable because game information is provided by the server and unless someone gets a hand on said server it's impossinble to give the information to the game.

Side note : You could object me that MMORPG are in fact hackable, but it supposes a server executable leak from the company, so I guess you can prevent such things.

 

[Ausdoerrt]

Private servers are also a way to "hack" and MMOG. As long as a community forms against the said private server, it's as good as done. Still, I'd say the most important form of protection that MMOs have is the fact that they're heavily dependent on large communities of gamers and PvP interaction. That's also why all but the most popular MMOs have gor F2P recently.

The idea you have sounds almost exactly like what Ubi is trying to do here, and yet it's been dealt with already. Plus, there's multiple ways to forego the "server check" without hacking the server.

 

[Sander]

Are you suggesting DRM free digital distribution doesn't exist or isn't rentable ?
Wow, that's ballsy...

I'm saying that at this point, no major, DRM-free alternative to Steam exists.

Pretend that DRM helps companies gain more money is okay, even if subject to controversy (BN says he has data he can't show and that curiously has never been published).
But to pretend that they wouldn't make money without is just absurd...
Piracy has been a fact for years, yet people still buy games, go to the cinema, and buy music. Seriously, get up with the times.
Studies even shows that the people who buy games and music ARE the very same people who also pirate.

No truly conclusive studies on this subject have been done, and several studies contradict themselves.

But, yes, piracy hurts companies. How is that surprising? It allows people to use a product they *might* have bought for free. That's a loss of revenue.

And yes, some people will buy games regardless or use piracy as a demo alternative. This clearly does not go for the majority of people.

 

[Ausdoerrt]

I think the question is not whether piracy hurts companies (although one could argue that in some cases it's negligible), but whether DRM stops piracy. And it doesn't seem like it does.

Also, I do think that if more companies started to release demo-versions again, that'd get rid of at least a proportion of piracy. With the number of people pirating games as large as it is, those kinds of people don't have to be a "majority" to matter.

Also, well, you can get books in libraries for free. Does that hurt publishing companies?

 

[Sander]

I think the question is not whether piracy hurts companies (although one could argue that in some cases it's negligible), but whether DRM stops piracy. And it doesn't seem like it does.

As BN noted before, apparently there's internal industry research suggesting that even a delay of one or two days in piracy release can save a lot of money.

I'd agree that not all DRM stops piracy and DRM can be excessiveand eventually, all DRM gets circumvented. The object of DRM isn't to make something impossible, it's to make it

Also, I do think that if more companies started to release demo-versions again, that'd get rid of at least a proportion of piracy. With the number of people pirating games as large as it is, those kinds of people don't have to be a "majority" to matter.

Actually, that wouldn't matter. If people only use piracy to demo and then buy the game if they like it, then there's no problem. So accomodating those people with demos is useless - they'll buy it if they like it anyway.

The problem isn't the people who would never have bought the game anyway, meaning the total amount of piracy isn't real relevant. The problem is the people who use this as an alternative to buying the game.

Also, well, you can get books in libraries for free. Does that hurt publishing companies?

Ehm, libraries pay for those books dude.

 

[Ausdoerrt]

Actually, that wouldn't matter. If people only use piracy to demo and then buy the game if they like it, then there's no problem. So accomodating those people with demos is useless - they'll buy it if they like it anyway.

You're right, although I'm sure that when we're presented with numbers for piracy, those are included. I'd be curious to know how big the percentage is, because I doubt it's negligible. It may be irrelevant, but gaming companies like to use those to blame lack of success for a poor product way too often.

The problem is the people who use this as an alternative to buying the game.

Sure, but then again, I believe that unless someone invents "perfect DRM" (which I wager is impossible, the Russians will crack it eventually), no DRM will stop the people who never buy games from pirating them. If it could, all other industries would have embraced such forms of protection already. I mean, the music industry likely suffers from more piracy than games, and yet there's no gay shit like this.

 

[Sander]

The idea, again, isn't to stop the people who will pirate anyway. The idea is to get to those who would buy it normally, especially those who just want the game quickly and don't care how.

 

[Ausdoerrt]

So, logically, wouldn't intrusive and complicated DRM actually turn off such people, because pirating the game is a lot simpler and less stressful than buying the originals? Especially since in most cases today generic DRM gets cracked on the day of the release. I'd say, game companies need to try harder to make buying the licensed product MORE rather than LESS appealing. Kind of like what the DVD publishers do with the extras, or the music industry with special packages and deals, etc. I think we need to see more of that.

 

[Sander]

So, logically, wouldn't intrusive and complicated DRM actually turn off such people, because pirating the game is a lot simpler and less stressful than buying the originals? Especially since in most cases today generic DRM gets cracked on the day of the release. I'd say, game companies need to try harder to make buying the licensed product MORE rather than LESS appealing. Kind of like what the DVD publishers do with the extras, or the music industry with special packages and deals, etc. I think we need to see more of that.

There's a balance somewhere.

See, you do get people to buy games when it takes a couple days for pirated copies to show up. Like what happened with the Batman game, where early pirated games were broken and later pirated games were fine.

 

[Sicblades]

As BN noted before, apparently there's internal industry research suggesting that even a delay of one or two days in piracy release can save a lot of money.

This is especially sad as it just shows you how little the fanboys are willing to wait for something. I'd rather have the $60 dollars in my pocket than saying "I was the first to get it at that midnight launch!!!111!"

 

[PlanHex]

See, you do get people to buy games when it takes a couple days for pirated copies to show up. Like what happened with the Batman game, where early pirated games were broken and later pirated games were fine.

In this case, the porting of AC2 to PC has taken 5 months, so you'd think the pirates could stand to wait one more day, or they would've broken down and gotten a console long ago.

 

[jorj82]

Why do they think that requiring an internet connection is gonna stop piracy? Most people seem to get their pirated software FROM THE INTERNET!! Or is there something I'm missing...?

 

[Ausdoerrt]

There's a balance somewhere.

See, you do get people to buy games when it takes a couple days for pirated copies to show up. Like what happened with the Batman game, where early pirated games were broken and later pirated games were fine.

I guess. It's just that I would group the people who HAVE to have a game on release date/preorder into the "would buy anyway" group. Since we agreed that they're not the targets for DRM, they're irrelevant. Unless I got your last post wrong, we also agree that DRM targets the people who see pirating as an alternative to buying a game. As such, these are the sorts of people who would wait for a price drop, and, well, pirates usually finish the job faster and cheaper, and without the DRM hassle.

So, why wager on how long it takes the pirates to crack the DRM and hope it's enough time to sell the necessary # of copies, rather than spending those resources on making the product more attractive to buy? Especially since in all but the most extreme cases, the countdown for a crack release of a popular game is in hours, not days. For example, the Russian SF-protected (SF being a more bitchy and difficult relative of Securom) FO3 was cracked about 12 hours after release. Disciples III in all its ingenuity took no more than 2 weeks. At the same time, both games felt like unfinished beta-tests full of bugs.

 

[otsego]

Also, well, you can get books in libraries for free. Does that hurt publishing companies?

The first thing I thought when I read this was 'No, because most people want the hard copy. They can either add it to their personal collection, or sell it off again to a used book store.' E-books can be pirated, can't they? Did the rise in e-book popularity hurt any sales?

Even though your example isn't really a good one to apply to games, it made me think about the days when you got those massive boxes with the paper manuals and extra goodies inside. You don't get that kind of stuff with games anymore, unless you get an overpriced collector's edition. I've actually taken to eBay to buy all of the classics that come in big boxes with all the peripherals that I've either missed or lost. Steam or GOG releases of said games don't interest me in the least. I want a tangible form, and all the extras I can get.

Just like I want a tangible form of a book.

If that isn't offered any longer (which it hasn't been for some time), the incentive to buy a DVD case with a DVD enclosed is kinda diminished. You get in a download what you would get from a store.

You think this sort of change has had anything to do with piracy? Or is it that increased piracy lead to decreasing packaging costs and increasing store shelf space?

 

[Sander]

I guess. It's just that I would group the people who HAVE to have a game on release date/preorder into the "would buy anyway" group.

Eh...why? There's no real reason for doing this.

 

[Ausdoerrt]

^ It's logical. If you're extremely interested in a product, you don't care about the money. If you care about the money, you would probably wait for the product. I just can't see someone who's a big fan of a franchise/publisher etc. not buying a licensed copy.

 

[Sander]

^ It's logical. If you're extremely interested in a product, you don't care about the money. If you care about the money, you would probably wait for the product. I just can't see someone who's a big fan of a franchise/publisher etc. not buying a licensed copy.

You don't need to be a big fan to want to play a game quickly. When games get pirated quickly, that's often the quickest way to get the game. If that can be delayed then people move over to stores.

 

[Crni Vuk]

Wow. That's fast.
Well, I'am glad that awful piece of crap DRM was cracked, constant internet access to play a single player game is moronic at best.
Atleast now someone might be able to reliably play the game that they legally bought.

I am not. I wish they would not have been able to hack it so fast. Cause now they have a reason to say "look, we are right with what ever we do ! Pirates are responsible for our bad sales !". I mean will Ubisoft and other companies finally realise that the way to get customers in buying your products is making "good" games ? See Spore it was a disaster but yeah pirates are responsible for that and not cause the game was seen by many as boring and not very interesting I doubt Spore has seen more piracy then comparable games. I have never played Spore but I have read on many places its quite uninspiring and repetitive after some time same situations with Titan Quest. I bought Supreme Commander and love the game a lot. And surpsingly I never experienced any bugs! Nor has the game forced me to make some account or such nonsense. Good game! Very comfortable instalation! Thats what I want at least.

A game that's crappy and nobody cares about is "unpiratable". I'm sure game companies would love to have other forms of "unpiratable" games, but "if there's a will, there's a way" is an old axiom that hasn't been disproved thus far.

The way I see it, companies are wasting precious resources to develop new DRM that they could use to make games more fun to play, and give people more incentive to buy them. The way it is now, you get games that you don't know are good or not, because they're unrentable, don't have demos, and are impractical to buy-and-resell, because of restrictive DRM. And I really can't see how this would benefit the sales.

Exactly what I think as well. This is not if piracy is a good or bad thing thats another issue. But the fact that companies like EA, Ubisoft and others love to butt-fuck their users and not just that but throw out uninspiring and bad games out isnt helping the situation either. I have not bought much games recently cause they seem not worth to be played why should I waste my money on crap games CoD 5 ? What is it about anyway. BF modern warefare ? I play mainly modifications at the moment and games I can get for 5 $ on steam like Man of War one searching for a real great gaming experience will not get that from those big companies if you ask me. At least that way I dont need 5 different accounts on my PC from GFWL, Rockstarsoftware or what ever else. Steam is enough for me.

See, you do get people to buy games when it takes a couple days for pirated copies to show up. Like what happened with the Batman game, where early pirated games were broken and later pirated games were fine.

In this case, the porting of AC2 to PC has taken 5 months, so you'd think the pirates could stand to wait one more day, or they would've broken down and gotten a console long ago.

As BN noted before, apparently there's internal industry research suggesting that even a delay of one or two days in piracy release can save a lot of money.

This is especially sad as it just shows you how little the fanboys are willing to wait for something. I'd rather have the $60 dollars in my pocket than saying "I was the first to get it at that midnight launch!!!111!"

you should though not forget eventualy that there is a difference in people though. Some that hack and crack those games do not even care about the games. They just love the challange. If you go to one of those "forums" for example and read about what people write regarding Starforce and other copy protections some have really a lot of un in doing nothing more then ... crack it beeing the first that found a way around a protection everyone called "not possible to hack". Well ... some games dont get hacked cause no one has a interest in them. The more popular a platform or game is the biger is the chance to see it hacked at some point. Though I think a game company has a right to work against that and secure its products. But what I dont like is that I as the honest costumer have to deal with such shit like 4 different acounts and what ever else. hence why I almost dont play games anymore except for old stuff and DRM free gamese.

also:

 

[Ausdoerrt]

Exactly what I think as well. This is not if piracy is a good or bad thing thats another issue. But the fact that companies like EA, Ubisoft and others love to butt-fuck their users and not just that but throw out uninspiring and bad games out isnt helping the situation either.

Yup, and in fact most people who do the actual hacking do just to butt-fuck them back. Ironically, they also buy their games to hack them ^___^

You don't need to be a big fan to want to play a game quickly.

I dunno, my definition of a "fan" of a game includes wanting to play a new release as quickly as possible. I'd be curious to hear your definition.

You may be right, but it just seems to me like a cool release with all sorts of extras and game related content in a better incentive to buy the licensed copy rather than the "you have to wait two days to get it pirated" reason. Also, positive incentives usually work a lot more efficiently than negative incentives, so I'm not sure why gaming markets should be different from everything else in the world.