|
Post by mysterd on Jan 27, 2010 0:01:50 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jan 27, 2010 2:11:57 GMT
Yes, well. I think I'll just pass on all future Ubisoft games, then. At least until they come to their senses. More money saved, so there's a silver lining, at least 
|
|
|
Post by mysterd on Jan 28, 2010 2:41:42 GMT
I can understand why Ubi's going this route - as piracy is a murderer of sales, especially on the PC - but, I don't have to like that they're making SP PC games act like online MMO's by requiring Internet connection .
What they are doing is causing a lot of backlash from PC gamers and the Internet, as expected, which will likely cause them to lose even WAY more PC game sales.
It might be inevitable that they lessen some of the DRM policy and requirements - in which, they're probably looking to be praised by the community for doing so at least by some portion of the community (see when DRM got lessened a little bit on Bioshock, Spore, Mass Effect and for examples) - but, they don't deserve praise. It's what should've been there in the first place - and in many instances, the DRM still needs to be lessened even more so.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jan 28, 2010 5:12:07 GMT
I can sympathise with them wanting to combat piracy, but I think they are going about it completely backwards. Instead of shoring up their customer base and trying to encourage sales by offering their customers a deal the pirates can't match in terms of convenience, useful updates, etc, they are alienating their customers and coming across as the bad guys - which is some achievement when you consider that their goals are fair ones that are supported by most if not all legitimate gamers!
I think it needs a very special kind of stupidity to get that result.
I suspect companies will get far better results using a carrot and stick approach (As Bioware and others are trying with their 'rewards for registration' system) rather than just punishing everything in sight, just in case they might be a pirate.
|
|
|
Post by Terrordar on Jan 28, 2010 21:52:39 GMT
They are also pointing out you can install their games on as MANY machines as you like. There is no limit to that number.
And to be honest? What gamer ISN'T connected to the web when playing? Hypothetically, yes, they could be screwed. Hypothetically. And an asteroid strikes Mars and pushes it into the Earth's orbit an hour afterwards as well too given that kind of likelihood.
|
|
|
Post by mysterd on Jan 28, 2010 22:25:15 GMT
They are also pointing out you can install their games on as MANY machines as you like. There is no limit to that number. Steam doesn't have install limits either. It's up to third party dev's if they want to throw in additional silly DRM limitations - which often come from extra Tages or Securom support from the publisher. There really never should be install limits in the first place, anyways. My Verizon DSL Internet connection was down for HOURS yesterday, thanks. So, under Ubi's system, I'd be screwed - from 5:15pm to around almost 8-something PM. If I actually got the game booted b/c I was online and then lost my connection while playing, now I won't be able to save my game b/c I'm not online. For SP games, this connection should NOT be needed to play. PERIOD. We don't see SP console games requiring XBL or PSN to boot, do we? Not yet, at least.... Point of Single player = I PLAY ALONE without any need of ties to the rest of the world. Yesterday, I played Dragon Age pretty much a good deal of the evening - pretty much til around 10:30pm or so. If DAO was under Ubi's system, I'd be screwed - either w/ being unable to play it and/or unable to save. Tell Ubi to call me when they change their policy for SP games. They really should follow EA's example for Bad Company 2, if you ask me.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jan 29, 2010 1:13:14 GMT
I for one am not online all the time - especially when playing games. And that's how I like it, thanks.
Many people also have a limit to the amount of data they can download in a given period, or deals that give them cheaper access at certain terms (if they lack broadband - it's still not universal). Ubi's policy would impact that quite sharply.
That's without including people who are travelling and thus have no immediate access and those whose connections cut on them for some reason or other.
Honestly, is there a single person here who can say that their connection has NEVER been cut by any kind of line or server fault that's completely out of their control? I know mine has.
There are still plenty of people who play games but don't use or need the web that much. Every one of them might find themselves hurt by this DRM.
|
|
|
Post by Nero the Glorious on Feb 1, 2010 17:27:08 GMT
I had never really cared about this, though nominally agreed with you guys.
But recently I have been very irritated by the new system for online games in MW2...
There are no longer private servers, all of the games are matched etc by the game...and the worst part is I get disconnected all the freaking time because of server and/or punkbuster issues...very frustrating.
|
|
|
Post by mysterd on Feb 2, 2010 0:33:01 GMT
I had never really cared about this, though nominally agreed with you guys. But recently I have been very irritated by the new system for online games in MW2... There are no longer private servers, all of the games are matched etc by the game...and the worst part is I get disconnected all the freaking time because of server and/or punkbuster issues...very frustrating. Yeah, I knew MW2 PC was in trouble, when IWNet was introduced - especially after seeing how Demigod failed w/ its matchmaking system and all. Disconnects; gamers dropping out; too many gamers playing from different countries; and all that jazz was bad for Demigod - I could imagine how bad it would be w/ IWNet. If the game is NOT a MMO, I think dedicated servers for online MP is the best way for MP to be done - end of story. It's been proven on the PC, as many of the best PC games that utilize MP have worked very well. It worked fine in COD4: Modern Warfare - so, I dunno why they didn't just keep that. I'd bet more people are probably playing COD4:MW PC online and more servers are going there than on MW2.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Feb 2, 2010 8:40:13 GMT
At a guess: non-dedicated servers are cheaper.
Also starts me wondering whether Ubisoft's new DRM will run into all these problems, especially with a few games out and all, presumably, running off the same servers...
|
|
|
Post by mysterd on Feb 4, 2010 21:42:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Feb 4, 2010 23:00:55 GMT
Interesting stuff. Thanks, D 
|
|
|
Post by mysterd on Feb 17, 2010 22:20:53 GMT
|
|
|
Post by mysterd on Feb 18, 2010 2:29:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Hand-E-Food on Feb 18, 2010 2:37:07 GMT
Lovely. So my wireless connection bounces for a second, and I'm booted.  Thankfully, UbiSoft don't produce any games I care to play.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Feb 18, 2010 7:24:05 GMT
Shouldn't they call it 'U-Don't-Play'? Sounds a lot more honest...
Not a hope in heck I'm ever getting anything with that crap on it!
|
|
|
Post by Ubereil on Feb 18, 2010 12:49:37 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Feb 18, 2010 13:14:28 GMT
Good find, Ube!  I suspect the boycott idea they propose will prove rather popular. Love the final paragraph:
|
|
|
Post by Alrik on Feb 18, 2010 14:26:18 GMT
Ubi should better prepare for a massive outcry from Germany, if the rumor is true that this new DRM wil be implemented in The Settlers 7, too ... This game series is still *hugely* popular here in Germany !
|
|
|
Post by Nero the Glorious on Feb 18, 2010 14:50:02 GMT
Its creepy knowing that somewhere out there a server is tracking how much time I waste gaming...
|
|