Pachter Supports Ubisoft DRM

[Xanadu84]

In all honesty, Steam has given me more trouble than Ubisoft's DRM. Maybe I'm just one of the lucky ones?

Or unlucky. I have never seen a problem with steam in the years ive used it for almost every last game I play, since its launch. I have a good 6 or so friends who play just as much as me, consistently, since Steams launch, and same deal. Actually, once, Offline mode didn't work properly. There was a 20 minute stretch which I couldn't play. A pretty good record for 5+ years.

And I agree with most people here, this guys response doesn't even make sense. He is arguing a completely unrelated argument then the one at hand. It's actually hard to argue against non sequitars

 

[Jandau]

Point Pachter

^ Yeah, he missed it.

Nobody is denying Ubisoft the right to protect their products. However, the question isn't about pirates, but rather legitimate customers who get screwed over by the DRM. If it IS about pirates, then it should be about how they cracked the DRM and play in peace while the legitimate customers get screwed over.

Mr. Pachter completely overlooks the legitimate customers in his argument since apparently he has nothing to justify the treatment they recieve. Instead, he passive-agressively states that anyone who disagrees with him in any way is likely a pirate or at least supporting piracy.

In short, he's a douche. Douches should be ignored. That is all.

 

[Denamic]

Pachter is well aware that this view will make him unpopular: "I welcome the flamer comments on this one ... we have no interest in your business since you don't pay for stuff anyway."

I didn't like him before, but now I just plain hate the asshat.

 

[SaintWaldo]

When a company sells you a game they have no problem if you resell it and someone else buys it and they have no problem if you give it away.

um... Anyone else see something wrong here? I don't think he has seen what companies are doing to prevent used game sales...

Actually, not all companies are against used sales. Some (EA being a recent example) are NOT trying to prevent used game sales. They are trying to figure out how to continue to capture revenue. Making the online portions tied to a code that can be purchased separately seems a good way to split online operating costs from the physical box.

Pachter's statement makes sense in light of the Doctrine of First Sale. He's cagily avoiding how one would re-sell a digital download. He still seems to get the main reasonable conclusion: overall, the gaming business is more stable if used games help smooth out revenue for retailers.

And, I'm sorry, it's his job to know a little bit more about game companies actions and future plans about used sales. That he's offered himself as a voice of reason in opining that used sales are not going away should give you hope.

 

[SaintWaldo]

In short, he's a douche. Douches should be ignored. That is all.

So, I have your permission to ignore you, then?

 

[Arec Balrin]

So how do I get a job commenting on and 'analysing' a subject I know nothing about?

Hoping to be a brain science or rocket surgery analyst.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

Soooooo... wait a minute. If I pay for a game, and then am unable to play it because the embedded DRM can't connect to the server Ubisoft is responsible for running, then haven't I been stolen from? I've paid for something and can't do anything with it by fault of the company that sold it to me. Shouldn't someone be going to jail for that?

Or do laws no longer apply to corporations now?

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Ah jeez...I liked this guy too.

Ubisoft DRM only screws the legitimate customers, that is unavoidable. I guess he's only concerned about the money, not the quality of the product you are exchanging it for.

I just don't think you can have such a fixed position on piracy and retain credibility. I have songs on my computer that friends have sent me via messenger...apparently that is like walking into a shop and nabbing a CD from behind the counter, and I should be locked up...because I'm a criminal.

 

[Covarr]

This just proves what I already knew: Michael Pachter is an idiot.

What really pisses me off, though, is that he's still considered newsworthy. Why is it that every time he says something all the sites post about it? Absolutely NOTHING he says has any value, it's all either blatantly obvious or completely wrong.

P.S. Thanks

 

[SaintWaldo]

PS: the 'bitTorrent' guys aren't in jail, Mr. Pachter. If he's speaking of the PirateBay guys, last I saw their case was being appealed. Not that it's good or bad, just that he's wrong. Again.

He may not have been speaking of the coders. He also may not have been speaking of PirateBay. He might be speaking of stuff like this [http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2006/10/8089.ars]. There are bittorrent inmates. Just because they aren't in Sweden does not mean they don't exist. Perhaps Mr. Pachter isn't so wrong?

 

[Eruanno]

And now nobody likes Michael Pachter either.

 

[Woodsey]

You're right, he's completely missed the point.

I really don't like this guy - especially as of late, it seems like he's dribbling shit out of his mouth every 5 minutes.

He either predicts stuff that any idiot's arse hole could work out, or he just says things that are stupidly wrong; he said something like that about PC gaming a few weeks ago which really got me pissed.

 

[Danpascooch]

He doesn't get that it's not that they are trying to protect their property, it's that they are doing it by hurting the purchasers, while the pirate's get a BETTER version of the game!

 

[Tzekelkan]

He completely missed the point and didn't answer the question. His show is pretty good most of the time, but this last time he was just talking out of his ass.

 

[Wicky_42]

"When a company sells you a game they have no problem if you resell it and someone else buys it and they have no problem if you give it away."

Well, he obviously doesn't understand that that's exactly what DRM prevents in real terms. Or that the company DOES have a problem if you resell it (see second hand games = priacy -_-U).

And let's be honest here, the difference between GIVING AWAY your copy and GIVING AWAY the files of your copy have very little monetary difference - someone still gets to play the game for free, but so long as there's only one use per licence he's happy? I'm not sure the hard-core anti-piracy crowd would buy that (heh, punny) - "you NEED to pay if you're going to use the content, and you NEED to pay the developers (by which the mean the publishers...)"

 

[slopeslider]

Which one is true theft, Mr. Pachter? Downloading a *copy* of something that might not have been purchased anyway, or taking money for a product that can be crippled or unusable due to circumstances on the *vendor's* end - and thus instantly devalued - that renders the paid for product a big pile of zero?

Because he's so blatantly uninformed about what he's speaking of, he's supporting the practice of selling defective products, for that's what Ubisoft is selling with this waste of money and goodwill.

And the gaming industry supports used game sales?! For godsakes, doesn't he read TheEscapist?! Kotaku? GamaSutra? RPS? PCGaming? ArsTechnica? ANY blog or journal to do with the industry he 'analyzes' that has quoted some of its major players saying exactly the opposite?!

Perhaps they should all stop giving him any coverage, for he is obviously not paying attention. Or he's a shill for the DRM industry.

Ugh. I'm so tired of being expected to PAY for the short end and smile while doing it.*

Sincerely,
Not Buying, Not Pirating, Not Bothering.

*not just for video games; the feeling is kinda pervasive for anything you buy these days. Maybe it's just me...

PS: the 'bitTorrent' guys aren't in jail, Mr. Pachter. If he's speaking of the PirateBay guys, last I saw their case was being appealed. Not that it's good or bad, just that he's wrong. Again.

NOO
If you don't buy Ubisoft's games new then how will the developers get money to feed their children?
Are you an advocate of taking out your problems with a dmr onto innocent people's children's food supply?
YOU'RE SICK.
It is our DUTY to buy these games so they can get money, as often as we can.
If you didn't buy it because you don't like the drm, They don't get your money. If you pirated it because you didn't like the drm, they didn't get your money. Either way, they didn't get your money, so YOU ARE NO BETTER TO THEM THAN A PIRATE!!!!!1
You WILL pay for the short end of the stick and SMILE doing it!!!

 

[RowdyRodimus]

Rowdys Proverb of the day:
Any lawyer who claims to be ethical has just become the most unethical man alive.

 

[Booze Zombie]

This man opinion has no bearing on anything of any importance. The question wasn't do you approve of DRM in general, but Ubisofts DRM. The man didn't answer the question, and probably has no idea what kind of DRM was used. He needs to re answer the question so that he doesn't look like a fool.

Goddamn ninjas!

It seriously does just reek of Patch not even looking at the question or the answer, but simply saying "I have an opinion and if you disagree with me... YOU'RE A THIEF AND I DON'T CARE WHAT YOU THINK, unless you agree with me, then I care".