Ubisoft vs. Ubisoft's Customers

Recommended Videos

ph0b0s123

New member
Jul 7, 2010
1,689
0
0
BeerTent said:
Shamus Young said:
Ubisoft vs. Ubisoft's Customers

Ubisoft's DRM only works against an outdated mode of piracy.

Read Full Article
Your missing something.

This IS how piracy works before the game is released, sharing discs. What's more embarrassing? Having your creation stolen by the masses a week after it was released, cracked by... Err, a "Certain group", or a week before it was released when Carl's sister's buddy uploaded it for said group?

Still though, I agree... Ubisoft is a little more than draconian.
It would be a good point if it had anything to do with the discussion at hand. How is your point applicable to the discussion about the DRM in the final product? The games getting shared before release is a failure on the part if the game maker to control their product before release. It has nothing to do with DRM or the point the poster was making, that the DRM in the final product is only effective against a type of piracy that is very rare in products that have launched. This should have been obvious.

O/P: Perfect analysis of the situation, which will unfortunately fall on deaf ears. Ubisoft will see their products being pirated more and think the only choice is even worse DRM, completely missing the point that their existing DRM is creating the environment where piracy of their products are increasing, it becomes circular. I don't kno,w maybe they want to get the piracy on PC for their games up to 90% so it fits in with what they already believe. Then they can chuck in the towel.
 

draythefingerless

New member
Jul 10, 2010
539
0
0
welcome Shamus. you connected the dots. enjoy the enlightened information that Ubisoft are a bunch of fucking french morons. this is what happens when console companies try to understand how PC works. ADOYYY? WHAT IS THIS KEYBOARD MA THINGY?
 

draythefingerless

New member
Jul 10, 2010
539
0
0
BeerTent said:
Shamus Young said:
Ubisoft vs. Ubisoft's Customers

Ubisoft's DRM only works against an outdated mode of piracy.

Read Full Article
Your missing something.

This IS how piracy works before the game is released, sharing discs. What's more embarrassing? Having your creation stolen by the masses a week after it was released, cracked by... Err, a "Certain group", or a week before it was released when Carl's sister's buddy uploaded it for said group?

Still though, I agree... Ubisoft is a little more than draconian.
rarely do PC games get cracked before release. that is almost entirely a console problem. i see nowadays EVERY console game gets cracked into torrents a week beore it comes out. ALL OF THEM.
 

Xeorm

New member
Apr 13, 2010
361
0
0
BeerTent said:
Your missing something.

This IS how piracy works before the game is released, sharing discs. What's more embarrassing? Having your creation stolen by the masses a week after it was released, cracked by... Err, a "Certain group", or a week before it was released when Carl's sister's buddy uploaded it for said group?

Still though, I agree... Ubisoft is a little more than draconian.
This type of "piracy" is solved by requiring a cd in the drive. That's about all you need, and isn't very limiting at all, and doesn't annoy the customer too much
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
Yes well, this is exactly the kind of thing that has me all over the gaming industry, and Ubisoft has been one of the worst, most unrepentant culprits within the gaming industry, and to be honest what they have gotten away with has just made things worse as it's encouraged more and more companies to follow suit.

In Ubisoft's case I look at the horrible "always online DRM" that was started with "Assasin's Creed 2". Given that Ubisoft continued to make money, and has seen two sequels to that game series since then, has ultimatly shown that gamers will complain, but won't actually take their money elsewhere, and unless we do, nothing is accomplished. People are willing to complain about the DRM, activation limits, and other assorted things but won't actually go so far as to go without the newest "Assasin's Creed" game. The industry as a whole has doubtlessly noticed that.

As far as oblivious and incompetant goes, that's not really an issue with just Ubisoft. Right now I've got a serious gripe with EA (which hardly makes me unique) over their handling of "The Old Republic" and "Origin". What they did was send the wrong codes out to Gamestop so when I bought a Collector's Edition they gave me a code for a standard edition. I eventually got an appropriate code, but the EA/Origin system won't let you redeem more than one code for the same product. Tech support told me the only way to deal with this was to start a new account and put my code in there, and then later they would set up some way I could combine my accounts. I basically wound up with two accounts, one for ToR, and one having my other EA games. I more or less forgot about this until recently when I picked up "Kingdoms Of Amalur" and installed it, and found out it was installed under my ToR account, which is seperate from my other EA games, Bioware Social, etc... which of course raises some interesting questions if I decide to play ME3 despite my misgivings and want all the promotions I'm entitled to since my games are now scattered between two accounts... and yes, after months there is STILL no way to condense all my EA registrations into one account.

The point here is that the industry doesn't do the fixes to the infrastructure they promise, or own up to their mistakes, unless somehow forced into it... by say a popular website with a lot of community influance like just happened with Ubisoft, even if they never actually said they screwed up.

The bottom line here is that we need to see laws granting more protection and rights to customers by limiting what hoops a company can make someone jump through, and also clearly stating that if someone pays for something they own it, and have control of it, not the people who manufactured it... which includes the right to re-sell it. That would deep six a lot of this garbage right then and there.
 

luckshot

New member
Jul 18, 2008
426
0
0
i think ubisoft has reached the sort of mindset of a pet left alone in the house for a weekend with 4 bowls of food. they see the food in the bowl and eat it...then they see the next bowl, and this process continues until the pet is in a dangerous food coma and there will be no food later.

so i dont think of it as completely brain dead twitching causing ubi these problems, its uninformed instinct

this kind of thinking/instinct by ubi seems brilliant because they think you will be back in three hours to give them more food (buy their games) it doesnt cross their minds that you left and wont be back for three days (forever) and wont feed them


when they clean up their act i might go back and feed them but somebody else is gonna have to clean the poop
 

shintakie10

New member
Sep 3, 2008
1,342
0
0
Therumancer said:
Yes well, this is exactly the kind of thing that has me all over the gaming industry, and Ubisoft has been one of the worst, most unrepentant culprits within the gaming industry, and to be honest what they have gotten away with has just made things worse as it's encouraged more and more companies to follow suit.

In Ubisoft's case I look at the horrible "always online DRM" that was started with "Assasin's Creed 2". Given that Ubisoft continued to make money, and has seen two sequels to that game series since then, has ultimatly shown that gamers will complain, but won't actually take their money elsewhere, and unless we do, nothing is accomplished. People are willing to complain about the DRM, activation limits, and other assorted things but won't actually go so far as to go without the newest "Assasin's Creed" game. The industry as a whole has doubtlessly noticed that.

As far as oblivious and incompetant goes, that's not really an issue with just Ubisoft. Right now I've got a serious gripe with EA (which hardly makes me unique) over their handling of "The Old Republic" and "Origin". What they did was send the wrong codes out to Gamestop so when I bought a Collector's Edition they gave me a code for a standard edition. I eventually got an appropriate code, but the EA/Origin system won't let you redeem more than one code for the same product. Tech support told me the only way to deal with this was to start a new account and put my code in there, and then later they would set up some way I could combine my accounts. I basically wound up with two accounts, one for ToR, and one having my other EA games. I more or less forgot about this until recently when I picked up "Kingdoms Of Amalur" and installed it, and found out it was installed under my ToR account, which is seperate from my other EA games, Bioware Social, etc... which of course raises some interesting questions if I decide to play ME3 despite my misgivings and want all the promotions I'm entitled to since my games are now scattered between two accounts... and yes, after months there is STILL no way to condense all my EA registrations into one account.

The point here is that the industry doesn't do the fixes to the infrastructure they promise, or own up to their mistakes, unless somehow forced into it... by say a popular website with a lot of community influance like just happened with Ubisoft, even if they never actually said they screwed up.

The bottom line here is that we need to see laws granting more protection and rights to customers by limiting what hoops a company can make someone jump through, and also clearly stating that if someone pays for something they own it, and have control of it, not the people who manufactured it... which includes the right to re-sell it. That would deep six a lot of this garbage right then and there.
Your first point is one I've been harpin to friends lately. People keep throwin money at them so they take it as some sort of confirmation from the players that they're doin the right thing with their DRM. Until they stop makin money, they wont stop usin the DRM. I remember when the always on DRM was announced and how many people used this line "Well I guess I'm getting the 360 version. Ubisoft can suck it." Like buyin the 360 version was somehow a snub to Ubisoft.

As for the rest, that...sounds awful. You seriously couldn't activate two different product keys for the same game twice on the same account? Like...what the hell is the point of that?
 

Sight Unseen

The North Remembers
Nov 18, 2009
1,064
0
0
shintakie10 said:
Therumancer said:
Yes well, this is exactly the kind of thing that has me all over the gaming industry, and Ubisoft has been one of the worst, most unrepentant culprits within the gaming industry, and to be honest what they have gotten away with has just made things worse as it's encouraged more and more companies to follow suit.

In Ubisoft's case I look at the horrible "always online DRM" that was started with "Assasin's Creed 2". Given that Ubisoft continued to make money, and has seen two sequels to that game series since then, has ultimatly shown that gamers will complain, but won't actually take their money elsewhere, and unless we do, nothing is accomplished. People are willing to complain about the DRM, activation limits, and other assorted things but won't actually go so far as to go without the newest "Assasin's Creed" game. The industry as a whole has doubtlessly noticed that.

As far as oblivious and incompetant goes, that's not really an issue with just Ubisoft. Right now I've got a serious gripe with EA (which hardly makes me unique) over their handling of "The Old Republic" and "Origin". What they did was send the wrong codes out to Gamestop so when I bought a Collector's Edition they gave me a code for a standard edition. I eventually got an appropriate code, but the EA/Origin system won't let you redeem more than one code for the same product. Tech support told me the only way to deal with this was to start a new account and put my code in there, and then later they would set up some way I could combine my accounts. I basically wound up with two accounts, one for ToR, and one having my other EA games. I more or less forgot about this until recently when I picked up "Kingdoms Of Amalur" and installed it, and found out it was installed under my ToR account, which is seperate from my other EA games, Bioware Social, etc... which of course raises some interesting questions if I decide to play ME3 despite my misgivings and want all the promotions I'm entitled to since my games are now scattered between two accounts... and yes, after months there is STILL no way to condense all my EA registrations into one account.

The point here is that the industry doesn't do the fixes to the infrastructure they promise, or own up to their mistakes, unless somehow forced into it... by say a popular website with a lot of community influance like just happened with Ubisoft, even if they never actually said they screwed up.

The bottom line here is that we need to see laws granting more protection and rights to customers by limiting what hoops a company can make someone jump through, and also clearly stating that if someone pays for something they own it, and have control of it, not the people who manufactured it... which includes the right to re-sell it. That would deep six a lot of this garbage right then and there.
Your first point is one I've been harpin to friends lately. People keep throwin money at them so they take it as some sort of confirmation from the players that they're doin the right thing with their DRM. Until they stop makin money, they wont stop usin the DRM. I remember when the always on DRM was announced and how many people used this line "Well I guess I'm getting the 360 version. Ubisoft can suck it." Like buyin the 360 version was somehow a snub to Ubisoft.

As for the rest, that...sounds awful. You seriously couldn't activate two different product keys for the same game twice on the same account? Like...what the hell is the point of that?
I bet if you didn't buy their game, they'd attribute all the losses to piracy anyway, so no matter what, unless you get a mass letter writing campaign or something to tell them THIS IS WHY IM NOT BUYING YOUR GAME, it's pretty much a lose-lose situation.
 

rembrandtqeinstein

New member
Sep 4, 2009
2,173
0
0
Ubisoft has to answer the ultimate question of the universe

Let's say you have an ax. The kind that you could use, in a pinch, to hack a man's head off. And let's say that very situation comes up and for some very solid reasons you behead a man. On the follow-through, though, the handle of the ax snaps in half in a spray of splinters. So the next day you take it to the ax store down the block and get a new handle, fabricating a story for the guy behind the counter and explaining away the reddish dark stains as barbecue sauce.

Now, that next spring you find in your garage a creature that looks like a cross-bred badger and anaconda. A badgerconda. And so you grab your trusty ax and chop off one of the beast's heads, but in the process the blade of the ax strikes the concrete floor and shatters.

This means another trip to McMillan & Sons Ax Mart. As soon as you get home with your newly-headed ax, though, you meet the reanimated body of the guy you beheaded last year. He's also got a new head attached and it?s wearing that unique expression of "you're the man who killed me last Spring" resentment that one so rarely encounters in everyday life.

You brandish your ax. He takes a long look at the weapon with his squishy, rotting eyes and in a gargly voice he screams, "that's the same ax that slayed me!"

Is he right?
Btw if you haven't watched it see this video, the movie looks like its going to be awesomesauce http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1P0LmU4EwRM
 

TheMadJack

New member
Apr 6, 2010
111
0
0
Wolfram01 said:
Ils sont Quebecois! What else do you expect?
UbiShit has several studios in Quebec, that's true. But, the company itself it French, as in France French. Major decisions like DRM are not made by the studio. It's the publisher's branch of UbiShit that makes that decision.

AFA UbiShit and their games, I've boycotted them right after Assassin's Creed I. At the point where they announced their stupid and draconian "always online" scheme I jumped off their boat. It made me a tiny bit sad because, let's face it, some of their games were promising to be fun and entertaining, but this is not something I can adhere to.

Last... UbiShit is doing things like EA. They are control freak companies that care about one and only one thing, money. Nothing else. If making 2$ more at the expense of their customers is what's needed, they'll do it. Despite all their PR stating they listen to their customers, which is a blatant lie, all they really do is damage control. But the irony is, they never learn. They're perpetrating the same mistakes at each and every release. They also know 99% of their decision will get a backlash of outcry, but it's been decided (I'm certain) in advance that when it happens, or when they get caught, they'll relax their stance and be seen in a better light.

But only fools ever believed them. And gawd knows there are many, many fools...
 

Valanthe

New member
Sep 24, 2009
654
0
0
lotr rocks 0 said:
shintakie10 said:
Therumancer said:
Yes well, this is exactly the kind of thing that has me all over the gaming industry, and Ubisoft has been one of the worst, most unrepentant culprits within the gaming industry, and to be honest what they have gotten away with has just made things worse as it's encouraged more and more companies to follow suit.

In Ubisoft's case I look at the horrible "always online DRM" that was started with "Assasin's Creed 2". Given that Ubisoft continued to make money, and has seen two sequels to that game series since then, has ultimatly shown that gamers will complain, but won't actually take their money elsewhere, and unless we do, nothing is accomplished. People are willing to complain about the DRM, activation limits, and other assorted things but won't actually go so far as to go without the newest "Assasin's Creed" game. The industry as a whole has doubtlessly noticed that.

As far as oblivious and incompetant goes, that's not really an issue with just Ubisoft. Right now I've got a serious gripe with EA (which hardly makes me unique) over their handling of "The Old Republic" and "Origin". What they did was send the wrong codes out to Gamestop so when I bought a Collector's Edition they gave me a code for a standard edition. I eventually got an appropriate code, but the EA/Origin system won't let you redeem more than one code for the same product. Tech support told me the only way to deal with this was to start a new account and put my code in there, and then later they would set up some way I could combine my accounts. I basically wound up with two accounts, one for ToR, and one having my other EA games. I more or less forgot about this until recently when I picked up "Kingdoms Of Amalur" and installed it, and found out it was installed under my ToR account, which is seperate from my other EA games, Bioware Social, etc... which of course raises some interesting questions if I decide to play ME3 despite my misgivings and want all the promotions I'm entitled to since my games are now scattered between two accounts... and yes, after months there is STILL no way to condense all my EA registrations into one account.

The point here is that the industry doesn't do the fixes to the infrastructure they promise, or own up to their mistakes, unless somehow forced into it... by say a popular website with a lot of community influance like just happened with Ubisoft, even if they never actually said they screwed up.

The bottom line here is that we need to see laws granting more protection and rights to customers by limiting what hoops a company can make someone jump through, and also clearly stating that if someone pays for something they own it, and have control of it, not the people who manufactured it... which includes the right to re-sell it. That would deep six a lot of this garbage right then and there.
Your first point is one I've been harpin to friends lately. People keep throwin money at them so they take it as some sort of confirmation from the players that they're doin the right thing with their DRM. Until they stop makin money, they wont stop usin the DRM. I remember when the always on DRM was announced and how many people used this line "Well I guess I'm getting the 360 version. Ubisoft can suck it." Like buyin the 360 version was somehow a snub to Ubisoft.

As for the rest, that...sounds awful. You seriously couldn't activate two different product keys for the same game twice on the same account? Like...what the hell is the point of that?
I bet if you didn't buy their game, they'd attribute all the losses to piracy anyway, so no matter what, unless you get a mass letter writing campaign or something to tell them THIS IS WHY IM NOT BUYING YOUR GAME, it's pretty much a lose-lose situation.
basically this is exactly what I've done. I wrote a long email expressing all of my concerns about the direction and attitudes expressed by the talking heads at Ubisoft and worte that I will no longer be buying any of their games until they clean up their act and start treating their legitimate, paying customers with an ounce of respect.

I got a machine-written "We are sorry that you are unhappy with our product... yadda yadda" from a noreply customer service rep, and a week later that artica=le came out about them calling out PC Gamers for their "Bitching."

Long story short, I've gone out of my way to avoid Ubisoft titles ever since... Actually, that's not true, I bought Assassin's Creed, the original for 360 from Gamestop, used.
 

poiuppx

New member
Nov 17, 2009
674
0
0
I have to say, Ubisoft makes me wonder. I wish I could see what their actual in-house figures are for their PC games... are sales up? Down? Flat? If it's decreasing because of these insane DRM issues, do they see a rise in console as a migration of their consumers? Or do they not even consider the two groups as compatible, a possibility that seems more likely given their past comments?

What I would give to sit in on an executive meeting just to listen and learn what the actual top-level logic has been in these regards. As it stands, from what we know, their actions seem legitimately insane.
 

008Zulu_v1legacy

New member
Sep 6, 2009
6,019
0
0
Ubisoft have said that they don't like P.C gaming, maybe they are purposefully generating all this bad publicity as an excuse to stop making P.C titles.

It's not a good plan, but then again, this is Ubisoft we are talking about.
 

LorienvArden

New member
Feb 28, 2011
230
0
0
I would go so far to call the excessive "activation, registration & pray for service" routine that publishers force on their customers malware.
DRM is a simple check weither or not you own a license for a piece of software.
The industry has been trying for years to find a way to make this pipedream work out somehow, but the only thing they really managed is to make pirated versions even more desirable then the retail.
Somehow, the deciding intelectuals in those companies figure out how to shoot down new IPs for beeing not feasible if they fail to rake in the insane profits of carbon copied sequels, but can't pull the plug on project "Alienate our customers" years after it became abundandly clear it simply isn't working.

You have to provide a better service then the pirates. Loading even more BS onto your games that customers should accept in order to use your product that no pirate will ever bother about is just as pointless as trying to get that message into the head of an executive who hasn't got the foggiest clue about how his own market interacts with their competitors.