ubisoft ditches always on drm for pc titles

[cmdrdredd]

Can you say finally?

http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/09/05/ubisoft-officially-ditches-always-on-pc-drm

 

[you2]

Yea but will this be retoractively applied to heroes 6 ?

 

[Red Storm]

A step in the right direction.

 

[mmntech]

Ubisoft has been at war with gamers for some time. It's a small victory but one none the less. The contempt for the PC gaming community still remains. At least I can feel free to add AC3 to my fall gaming list.

 

[lupi]

Assuming they don't move to something worse this is a good move for thee users. Maybe the outspoken opposition to buying any titles with this along with the pirates flaunting its failures had an impact.

 

[Harrod]

Step 2 is focusing the time and energies of they spent on drm back into making a quality game, I would say this is a little too late at this point.

 

[Gothgar]

Hooray!!!!

 

[crownjules]

Finally coming to your senses Ubisoft! Maybe now I will buy Anno 2070.

 

[DaveSimmons]

If they patch existing games to remove it, then I might consider buying an Ubi game again someday. Maybe.

 

[JimKiler]

If they patch existing games to remove it, then I might consider buying an Ubi game again someday. Maybe.

I am sure they will the cost to patch existing games has to be cheaper than keeping the DRM servers online for years.

 

[gorcorps]

Can't read it right now, but does that mean AC3 releasing next month will have less annoying DRM?

 

[lupi]

Short response was they are using a one time activation (probably per install) with unlimited activations.

 

[Nintendesert]

Short response was they are using a one time activation (probably per install) with unlimited activations.

Which is perfectly reasonable.

 

[Elixer]

I will only believe it when I see it.

 

[cl-scott]

Ubisoft seems almost to be at war with itself. Wasn't it when they made that failed/aborted attempt at a new Prince of Persia trilogy they made a big deal about releasing it without any DRM as an experiment? Then when copies didn't just fly off the shelf, they apparently deemed it a failure. Never mind that the game was kind of lackluster, especially compared to the ones that preceded it.

I do sometimes wonder though... It costs tens of thousands, if not millions, of dollars to license this DRM tech that invariably gets cracked within hours of the game's release. So while I will admit there may well be another angle, or angles, I'm not considering, but it seems like the DRM is just a needless expense. IIRC, piracy rates were effectively unchanged with that PoP game, maybe slightly less. So the DRM is doing nothing to discourage piracy, but it is costing the company whatever the licensing fee is, along with any other associated costs, like running servers for the always-connected DRM, what exactly are they gaining? If they drop the DRM, and piracy rates stay more or less constant with what they are now, they save the $50K or whatever it costs to license the DRM. Ubisoft shareholders should be screaming for the CEO's head on a platter for effectively throwing away that much money.

 

[thilanliyan]

Good on Ubi for listening to gamers.

 

[gorcorps]

Good on Ubi for listening to gamers.

Listening to gamers my fat ass. We stopped paying for their garbage and their numbers finally came in which showed it. If this didn't hit them in their wallets they wouldn't have bothered.

 

[Oyeve]

Can't read it right now, but does that mean AC3 releasing next month will have less annoying DRM?

Yes indeed.

 

[WiseUp216]

Much of the goodwill earned was negated by the final quote:

"looking at adopting more F2P models in the future to try to recoup lost revenue."

Except for a few exceptions (TF2, Tribes), F2P has a long way to go before it becomes my primary gaming experience.

 

[smackababy]

Much of the goodwill earned was negated by the final quote:

"looking at adopting more F2P models in the future to try to recoup lost revenue."

Except for a few exceptions (TF2, Tribes), F2P has a long way to go before it becomes my primary gaming experience.

F2P is a viable model though. Look at LoL, Dota 2, HoN. Valve is banking on the fact that everyone wants a full game for free and will pay for hats for characters.

No good will should be lost over this. They are going to be GIVING away their games for free. Now, how these games utilize the F2P model and their gameplay will determine if Ubisoft can die in a fire or not. The Free 2 Win model is terrible.

 

[BrightCandle]

Ubisoft has finally caved. At last I can start to consider their games again. I still hate their guts but I get the distinct impression the feeling is mutual.

 

[cmdrdredd]

F2P is a viable model though. Look at LoL, Dota 2, HoN. Valve is banking on the fact that everyone wants a full game for free and will pay for hats for characters.

No good will should be lost over this. They are going to be GIVING away their games for free. Now, how these games utilize the F2P model and their gameplay will determine if Ubisoft can die in a fire or not. The Free 2 Win model is terrible.

You mean Pay to win? Like the game is free but the guy with $100 spare money can buy all the weapons and special ammo that is more powerful and rank up in the first day. Others doing it the old fashioned way suffer with useless weapons and no upgrades.

Or the worse method, limited ammo and health unless you have deep pockets and buy packs for $5 a pop.

 

[greenhawk]

"looking at adopting more F2P models in the future to try to recoup lost revenue."

there was a thread a few days back about Ubitsoft going F2P instead of DRM. If this is the point of their "change", I would not be expecting existing software to be back dated to have the DRM removed.

 

[Childs]

F2P is a viable model though. Look at LoL, Dota 2, HoN. Valve is banking on the fact that everyone wants a full game for free and will pay for hats for characters.

No good will should be lost over this. They are going to be GIVING away their games for free. Now, how these games utilize the F2P model and their gameplay will determine if Ubisoft can die in a fire or not. The Free 2 Win model is terrible.

I was looking at Gotham City Impostors, as it recently went F2P. When you look at all the DLC it comes to $150. I would rather pay $60 for a complete game. Well, not $60 for GCI, but nickel and dimming adding up to 3 x the retail price is ridiculous.

 

[smackababy]

You mean Pay to win? Like the game is free but the guy with $100 spare money can buy all the weapons and special ammo that is more powerful and rank up in the first day. Others doing it the old fashioned way suffer with useless weapons and no upgrades.

Or the worse method, limited ammo and health unless you have deep pockets and buy packs for $5 a pop.

Yeah that is what I meant. Look at League of Legends vs Dota 2. In LoL you have to buy heroes with either coins earned from play (lots of play) or real money. In Dota 2, you get all the heroes up front and can choose to buy vanity items.

I was looking at Gotham City Impostors, as it recently went F2P. When you look at all the DLC it comes to $150. I would rather pay $60 for a complete game. Well, not $60 for GCI, but nickel and dimming adding up to 3 x the retail price is ridiculous.

Yeah that isn't ideal, but look at games now. Pay $60 up front and then get nickel and dimed for DLC anyway. At the very least, F2P games can function as sort of a demo.