Ubi's DRM hacked

[Smoof]

http://news.cnet.com/8301-27076_3-20003120-248.html

Good. Let's hope this makes them think about putting this DRM on other games. I won't pirate Ubi's games, but I sure as hell won't be buying them either and they definitely had some I wanted to buy.

[Panthera]

StarForce lasted a year, this only lasted a month. Nice job.

[Adam Blue]

It's how it works. That's why getting worked up over DRM is a waste of time.

Thank you Ubisoft, this was quiete [sic] a challenge for us, but nothing stops the leading force from doing what we do. Next time focus on the game and not on the DRM. It was probably horrible for all legit users. We just make their lifes [sic] easier.

I'm sure the developers behind the game have nothing to do with the department that creates DRM. A better argument would be about convenience.

[Smoof]

It's how it works. That's why getting worked up over DRM is a waste of time.

That makes no sense. So, if my car get's stolen, I shouldn't get worked-up about it, because it'll probably be recovered by the police eventually? DRM isn't nearly so extreme, of course, but saying I ought not to get worked-up or boycott a game because the DRM will eventually get cracked anyway is utter bullshit.

The fact that the DRM screws the legitimate customer more than the pirate is all the information you need when it comes to taking a stance on DRM. Sure, I could get around it, but I shouldn't have to. I should be able to pop in the game, install it and play without worry of being online or my internet connection dropping or what have you.

[Ancalagon]

They spent money on DRM that could have been spent on hiring additional developers. So yeah, big waste of money, led to a net loss in sales because of the bad press, and didnt prevent piracy. Whats the point again?

[Philonious]

I think that they were hoping that they would be able to get more sales the first few weeks after release by holding pirates off, at least initially.

I guess that a better question would be: Does anyone have a better solution?

[Kelegacy]

Ha, good. Freedom!

[Panthera]

I think that they were hoping that they would be able to get more sales the first few weeks after release by holding pirates off, at least initially.

I guess that a better question would be: Does anyone have a better solution?

Yeah. Don't worry about the people who aren't going to buy your game anyway.

[Adam Blue]

That makes no sense. So, if my car get's stolen, I shouldn't get worked-up about it, because it'll probably be recovered by the police eventually? DRM isn't nearly so extreme, of course, but saying I ought not to get worked-up or boycott a game because the DRM will eventually get cracked anyway is utter bullshit.

The fact that the DRM screws the legitimate customer more than the pirate is all the information you need when it comes to taking a stance on DRM. Sure, I could get around it, but I shouldn't have to. I should be able to pop in the game, install it and play without worry of being online or my internet connection dropping or what have you.

Look dude, I think it sucks too. But what does whining about it do? Did they remove the DRM? No. It got cracked, just like every DRM before. It's just for the initial sales of the game really, like mentioned, but even then I have no figures to say whether publishers lose out on it or not. Unless someone out there has some numbers we can look at...

They aren't doing this for the fun of it.

I'm sticking with my stance of play the game you want to enjoy. If you get screwed over by the DRM, hopefully that affect itself is enough to get the publisher to change something. Boycotting sure won't do anything. If it did, holy fuck would things be so much different.

[Stmfuller]

GOOD!
I hope that learns em!

[Heretic Machine]

play the game you want to enjoy

Sure, but only ever pay for the games that are published by people who aren't actively trying to fuck over consumers. Then you get the best of both worlds.

[Dukefrukem]

I boycott. I make a difference.

[Hotcod]

Look dude, I think it sucks too. But what does whining about it do? Did they remove the DRM? No. It got cracked, just like every DRM before. It's just for the initial sales of the game really, like mentioned, but even then I have no figures to say whether publishers lose out on it or not. Unless someone out there has some numbers we can look at...

They aren't doing this for the fun of it.

I'm sticking with my stance of play the game you want to enjoy. If you get screwed over by the DRM, hopefully that affect itself is enough to get the publisher to change something. Boycotting sure won't do anything. If it did, holy fuck would things be so much different.

So don't whine about it but do if you buy the game? Give a company willing to screw paying consumers in the pursuit of profit, using logic that is very shake, your money to play a game you'll have to crack to get to work right.... in the hopes that complaining when they have your money and your sale to support there views that it's ok to carry on the practice that is hurting you as there consumer will rethink there DRM in the face of them selling units with some noise on the forums?

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooo k

[Adam Blue]

Sure, but only ever pay for the games that are published by people who aren't actively trying to fuck over consumers. Then you get the best of both worlds.

Not if you're missing out on games you would have fun with. In one way or another, any company will do things that the consumer would not be happy with. The intention of DRM is not to fuck over the consumer. Yeah, it unfortunately is a inconvenience, but the publisher is only trying to combat piracy.

The only thing you get out of not buying a game is the inability to play it.

I boycott. I make a difference.

I wish that were true. You are getting nothing out of this strategy though.

[Adam Blue]

So don't whine about it but do if you buy the game? Give a company willing to screw paying consumers in the pursuit of profit, using logic that is very shake, your money to play a game you'll have to crack to get to work right.... in the hopes that complaining when they have your money and your sale to support there views that it's ok to carry on the practice that is hurting you as there consumer will rethink there DRM in the face of them selling units with some noise on the forums?

oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooo k

Has boycotting worked? Are we getting anywhere with boycotting? Or are we more willing to get somewhere by being directly affected by the company's product?

Again, I wish boycotting worked. I really, really do. But it doesn't.

[Karak]

They spent money on DRM that could have been spent on hiring additional developers. So yeah, big waste of money, led to a net loss in sales because of the bad press, and didnt prevent piracy. Whats the point again?

No. Looking at the licensing and using DRM, its no were near a single developers yearly pay.
So they did didn't come close to that actually. Not a huge waste of money at all. And I am sure every single sale to the day before it was cracked they will try to spin as proof it worked. Is that true? Of course not:) But that's how its going.
We all know boycotting isn't and will not work. So...we are all stuck between a rock and a hard place:(

I am still sore over waiting for 4 months for my legit copy of Spore to finally work. 2 months in I downloaded the fucker and played it until they actually made the real one work. Bastards!

[Hotcod]

Has boycotting worked? Are we getting anywhere with boycotting? Or are we more willing to get somewhere by being directly affected by the company's product?

Again, I wish boycotting worked. I really, really do. But it doesn't.

Again, let me make get this right. You have no proof what so ever of the validity of boycotting but since the publishers who have spent vast ammounts of time and money on these DRM ideas have not done a U-turn on there investment with in a few moths of it going life you think they don't work. Which you then use to justify spending money on a product that the seller knows to be defective by the fact that these people, who are letting you pay them to screw you over, will listen to your complaints once they've made the sale?

Some how giving them money instead of withholding it is more likely to change there practices. It's not like publishers (who are vastly invested in there current choices and view of DRM) judge the success of these DRM set up by judging retail sales against peers of torrents of the game... oh... wait... no matter how you slice it if you buy the game you are giving them the green light that you are ok with how this DRM works. Any complaints you make after that point simply become viewed as "we need to refine our current system" since you have already shown that system is one you are happy to pay to use. If boycotts are as ineffective as you think they are they are at lest not actively counter productive.

The general market view of DRM is shifting very quickly at the moment. The success of steam is an indicator that there are types of DRM users are willing to pay for, DRM users are more likely to buy a game using it. It's only through the lack of sales of more proscribed DRM will we be able to produce change in the industry.

What is needed is for it to become established that of comparable games in type, budget and demographic the games with DRM users like sell more than those that don't. This is not going to the be the instant change you seem to assume it must be.

If you boycott ubisofts games in the hopes that they will just pitch up and remove the DRM if enough of us do it then you have very... simple... views about how boycotts and companies work. The Ubisofts DRM is going to be around for a good while even if there is a huge drop in sales... but at the same time, over time, even a small drop in sales when viewed as a part of the PC market can and will produce a rethink to the DRM if there are other effective DRM's people are happy to use on the market.

Point simply is you can't blame piracy for a drop in sales if all the comparable games of your competitors are selling better than you... and even if the small number of us who are well informed about this kind of thing, on the whole, stay away from ubisoft products so long as the DRM is in place there will be a drop in sales that will produce an effect. In other words the boycott a long haul effect and expecting instant reactions is naive.

By avoiding Ubisoft products we can hope to give the only effective indicator there DRM is doing more harm that good.

If we do it your way there is no concrete indicators, let alone one that effects profits.

It's either hope through action vs Or hope through compliance... when can provide definitive reasons to drop the DRM while the other provides whining about it

[Karak]

Again, let me make get this right. You have no proof what so ever of the validity of boycotting but since the publishers who have spent vast ammounts of time and money on these DRM ideas have not done a U-turn on there investment with in a few moths of it going life you think they don't work. Which you then use to justify spending money on a product that the seller knows to be defective by the fact that these people, who are letting you pay them to screw you over, will listen to your complaints once they've made the sale?

Some how giving them money instead of withholding it is more likely to change there practices. It's not like publishers (who are vastly invested in there current choices and view of DRM) judge the success of these DRM set up by judging retail sales against peers of torrents of the game... oh... wait... no matter how you slice it if you buy the game you are giving them the green light that you are ok with how this DRM works. Any complaints you make after that point simply become viewed as "we need to refine our current system" since you have already shown that system is one you are happy to pay to use. If boycotts are as ineffective as you think they are they are at lest not actively counter productive.

The general market view of DRM is shifting very quickly at the moment. The success of steam is an indicator that there are types of DRM users are willing to pay for, DRM users are more likely to buy a game using it. It's only through the lack of sales of more proscribed DRM will we be able to produce change in the industry.

What is needed is for it to become established that of comparable games in type, budget and demographic the games with DRM users like sell more than those that don't. This is not going to the be the instant change you seem to assume it must be.

If you boycott ubisofts games in the hopes that they will just pitch up and remove the DRM if enough of us do it then you have very... simple... views about how boycotts and companies work. The Ubisofts DRM is going to be around for a good while even if there is a huge drop in sales... but at the same time, over time, even a small drop in sales when viewed as a part of the PC market can and will produce a rethink to the DRM if there are other effective DRM's people are happy to use on the market.

Point simply is you can't blame piracy for a drop in sales if all the comparable games of your competitors are selling better than you... and even if the small number of us who are well informed about this kind of thing, on the whole, stay away from ubisoft products so long as the DRM is in place there will be a drop in sales that will produce an effect. In other words the boycott a long haul effect and expecting instant reactions is naive.

By avoiding Ubisoft products we can hope to give the only effective indicator there DRM is doing more harm that good.

If we do it your way there is no concrete indicators, let alone one that effects profits.

It's either hope through action vs Or hope through compliance... when can provide definitive reasons to drop the DRM while the other provides whining about it
Good arguments. Sadly none of us will ever know. I too assume boycotting does nothing because so far many games that supposedly get boycotted sell so high that well...its difficult to see.
But those are good point sir.
I personally think that Steam's success has almost nothing whatsoever with its DRM versus the hundreds of other good things about it. Maybe as time goes on, maybe not.

Some other problems.
Lets be honest most gamers don't even know about the DRM. I mean look at the forums of games lately. Many people don't investigate like people on a game thread do.
DRM is not expensive. Well some arn't, I am sure very specialized ones may be, but if you look at sales of some of these games the cost in one day of sales make up for it so...

Anyway good points you have. It's going to be very hard for anyone to see what impacts these are causing. I would love to know myself.

[J Arcane]

I'm not fucking interested in affecting change when I refused to buy things like Ass Creed II.

I'm interested in my fucking money not going to fucking douchebags who hate me and want to make my gameplaying as unfun and obnoxious as possible.

And further more, even if, as you say, my and other's decision not to buy has no effect (an accusation I deny, BTW, given it's Steam performance thus far), how is it any fucking more helpful to GIVE THEM MONEY FOR THIS SHIT?

That's not how capitalism works, man. The only vote in the market is that of your wallet. If you pay money for shit like COD6 and Ass Creed II, you are sending the only message that these companies care about: that you will give them your money regardless.

That's the argument for being a fucking sheep, and I refuse to behave like that, and I refuse to send the signal to these companies that I will just bend over and take shit like this.

By all means, keep throwing them your fucking money, but mine stays in my pocket, and I'll continue to laugh every time they up the ante and people like you wonder why.

[Karak]

I'm not fucking interested in affecting change when I refused to buy things like Ass Creed II.

I'm interested in my fucking money not going to fucking douchebags who hate me and want to make my gameplaying as unfun and obnoxious as possible.

And further more, even if, as you say, my and other's decision not to buy has no effect (an accusation I deny, BTW, given it's Steam performance thus far), how is it any fucking more helpful to GIVE THEM MONEY FOR THIS SHIT?

That's not how capitalism works, man. The only vote in the market is that of your wallet. If you pay money for shit like COD6 and Ass Creed II, you are sending the only message that these companies care about: that you will give them your money regardless.

That's the argument for being a fucking sheep, and I refuse to behave like that, and I refuse to send the signal to these companies that I will just bend over and take shit like this.

By all means, keep throwing them your fucking money, but mine stays in my pocket, and I'll continue to laugh every time they up the ante and people like you wonder why.
Dear Incredibly Angry Man:
To whom are you referring to in this well thought out and delicate message? :)

[J Arcane]

Dear Incredibly Angry Man:
To whom are you referring to in this well thought out and delicate message? :)

Sorry, I meant to quote Adam, I didn't mean to make it look like I was talking to you.

I'm just tired of his argument of "This sucks, but surely it won't affect anything if you buy it anyway".

[Karak]

Sorry, I meant to quote Adam, I didn't mean to make it look like I was talking to you.

I'm just tired of his argument of "This sucks, but surely it won't affect anything if you buy it anyway".

Gotcha. I was just wondering:)

[Adam Blue]

I'm just tired of his argument of "This sucks, but surely it won't affect anything if you buy it anyway".

Karak is pretty much in agreement with me it looks like, which I'm glad to see I'm not the only one at Colony of Gamers. So anything you say to me, whether or not he cares to address, it goes to both of us.

While I wouldn't be so quick as to say that's how I deal with any situation, for the DRM, I would. Does a blind accusation sound familiar to you? Let's move on.

What you need to understand is that the group of gamers that understands DRM and the idea of a boycott to stop DRM is such a small part of the market. So small, and this of course by fact if you look at sales, that a boycott cannot work.

Like I said, I wish it would. Since it's not working, it won't do shit if you do it. You know what may work better? Trying something else. Sitting back boycotting and being angry wont do anything. It doesn't do anything. Do you see it doing anything?

Being affected by the product and personally speaking to their customer service is more than doing the above. Remember, there's more parties involved than the publisher or whoever makes the decision on DRM. There's also the game designers that are proud of their work and may even be disappointed by the DRM, but cannot do a thing.

This whole 'capitalism' argument is another blanket statement like the one above that you tend to accuse me of. So don't think you're free and clear of it like you said you are in previous threads.

[Karak]

Karak is pretty much in agreement with me it looks like, which I'm glad to see I'm not the only one at Colony of Gamers. So anything you say to me, whether or not he cares to address, it goes to both of us.

While I wouldn't be so quick as to say that's how I deal with any situation, for the DRM, I would. Does a blind accusation sound familiar to you? Let's move on.

What you need to understand is that the group of gamers that understands DRM and the idea of a boycott to stop DRM is such a small part of the market. So small, and this of course by fact if you look at sales, that a boycott cannot work.

Like I said, I wish it would. Since it's not working, it won't do shit if you do it. You know what may work better? Trying something else. Sitting back boycotting and being angry wont do anything. It doesn't do anything. Do you see it doing anything?

Being affected by the product and personally speaking to their customer service is more than doing the above. Remember, there's more parties involved than the publisher or whoever makes the decision on DRM. There's also the game designers that are proud of their work and may even be disappointed by the DRM, but cannot do a thing.

This whole 'capitalism' argument is another blanket statement like the one above that you tend to accuse me of. So don't think you're free and clear of it like you said you are in previous threads.

I think I come to it in a totally different way however. So drawing a comparison between us may not be the best bet. I am saying I have no clue and no good measurement. Sometimes a freakishly hard concrete stance is all that stands between an angry retort and a simple back and forth communication.

I do not know it works.
I do not know if it does not work. I am not going to take a strong stance either way. That is the difference between all of us. You both seem to be at complete opposition. I am, and this is rare, in the middle and undecided.
Which may make me reflect on my own sanity:)

I feel that we are at a disservice due to the fact that we have no measuring device for true impact of DRM or boycotting. I base my game purchases on MANY aspects, sometimes...fuck just a gut feeling.

[jpublic]

I was actually proud of myself for not buying AC2 PC, boycotting it for not only the price but the DRM.

Then my brother bought it for me as a b-day present.

At which point I said 'fuck it, might as well play.'

[Ravenlock]

Whether boycotts work or not is kind of irrelevant to J's point, Adam, and it seemed like he tried to make that very clear.

Buying a game with this DRM on it explicitly supports the choice of the publisher to use that DRM. It rewards them for doing so. Some of us are unwilling to do that. Not because we think our $60 will be the $60 that stops them, but because we think it's wrong and we're not willing to give them a sale. End of story. We'd rather not play the game (or in the case of the new Splinter Cell game, for me, would rather rent it and return it on the 360).

Clearly, you are okay with financially supporting this DRM while claiming to oppose it. That stance is inconsistent, but obviously you're free to hold it anyhow. But don't pretend that your $60 isn't a vote in favor of the situation, because it absolutely is, whether you think it has any impact on the outcome or not. One vote in a heavily weighted political district doesn't impact the outcome either, but it's still that person's vote.

[Karak]

Whether boycotts work or not is kind of irrelevant to J's point, Adam, and it seemed like he tried to make that very clear.

Buying a game with this DRM on it explicitly supports the choice of the publisher to use that DRM. It rewards them for doing so. Some of us are unwilling to do that. Not because we think our $60 will be the $60 that stops them, but because we think it's wrong and we're not willing to give them a sale. End of story. We'd rather not play the game (or in the case of the new Splinter Cell game, for me, would rather rent it and return it on the 360).

Clearly, you are okay with financially supporting this DRM while claiming to oppose it. That stance is inconsistent, but obviously you're free to hold it anyhow. But don't pretend that your $60 isn't a vote in favor of the situation, because it absolutely is, whether you think it has any impact on the outcome or not. One vote in a heavily weighted political district doesn't impact the outcome either, but it's still that person's vote.

That's where this continues to get sticky. It most assuredly is not a vote for DRM as the only aspect to a game. That would be like saying you like the steering-wheel on a new car so that is the ONLY reason you bought the car, or worse yet...the only reason you did not. That's not REALLY the thought is it ;) And before we explode this conversation into other car aspects I of course am exaggerating as others are doing.

In addition a purchase is not a vote in favor of it(DRM because it is not a true part of the game itself), while choosing to NOT buy it around DRM is a choice because that is the sole reason you are not. Again your attributing 60.00 to be paying for DRM, like not paying is not wanting the DRM. The two are not equal.
That is a very narrow view and doesn't fit the argument.

However, there are graphics whores(which I am) so I assume there are DRM whores. But that doesn't seem too realistic. Trying to make it appear cut and dry does not in fact make it cut and dry.
I am not trying to be a dick but reducing it down to his purchase being a vote in favor for DRM doesn't take into account that he may also you know...like the game and think hey...its worth...money to play:)

[Adam Blue]

Whether boycotts work or not is kind of irrelevant to J's point, Adam, and it seemed like he tried to make that very clear.

Buying a game with this DRM on it explicitly supports the choice of the publisher to use that DRM. It rewards them for doing so. Some of us are unwilling to do that. Not because we think our $60 will be the $60 that stops them, but because we think it's wrong and we're not willing to give them a sale. End of story. We'd rather not play the game (or in the case of the new Splinter Cell game, for me, would rather rent it and return it on the 360).

Clearly, you are okay with financially supporting this DRM while claiming to oppose it. That stance is inconsistent, but obviously you're free to hold it anyhow. But don't pretend that your $60 isn't a vote in favor of the situation, because it absolutely is, whether you think it has any impact on the outcome or not. One vote in a heavily weighted political district doesn't impact the outcome either, but it's still that person's vote.

No I understand it. And I see why you may think it's inconsistent. But I do not, as I think being a consumer of a product failing on you does more than boycotting a product that is being consumed at such high levels that your non-sale has no affect.

It would be inconsistent if our views directly influenced the market, but sadly it does not. So there has to be another way, correct? Or do we just boycott? I understand it may be a moral dilemma, but we need to use more than our feelings at this point.

EDIT: Ha...I'm telling you Karak...you are pretty much saying what I think, just another way about it.

[Karak]

EDIT: Ha...I'm telling you Karak...you are pretty much saying what I think, just another way about it.

Perhaps. I just have some unique ideas because at my last job we DID lose sales that I think were due to some of our very basic DRM that we attempted. I had to explain this point for weeks before people began to understand it where I worked. We had some unique ways to combat it that worked. However, it is a very heated topic with many people almost putting it on some kind of...political or religious level discussion that I find causes more problems than just looking at it from the aspect of Purchase Worth.

Oh and one last thing. If ANYONE ever thinks for even a split second that publishers and developers DO NOT argue about these exact same things they are fucking deluded. Entire meetings revolve around this. And no one walks into a meeting saying "I can not wait to install Starforce" :)
What they want is for a product they worked on to be bought and enjoyed. That is all. Thus protection is needed and at this time in history if 500 people do not buy it due to DRM, but 10000 people can't download it and crack it...they most likely feel its a win.

I feel old because I am the one who used to rebuy games for my Apple 2 because I lost the manual with the information to fill in the secret questions to play some of the games. Back in the day when there was no web to look up stuff:) Man that sucked. Bard's Tale Thief of Fate...I am looking at you you sick bastard. 3 copies down.

[Ravenlock]

Karak, you're entirely right. I am opposed enough to the DRM to have the opposition justify passing up on a game that I would otherwise have purchased. In other words, I really fucking hate that steering wheel. ;) Whereas Adam is saying "I hate that steering wheel, but I'm willing to buy the car with the steering wheel I hate anyhow and just hope it doesn't catch on, because I want to drive the car."

No, his purchase does not directly endorse the steering wheel, but it still rewards the car's designer financially. And if the car succeeds, it seems a dicey proposition to assume anything other than that other designers will notice their design choices and follow suit - steering wheel potentially included.

Tortured metaphor over. :p

[Karak]

Karak, you're entirely right. I am opposed enough to the DRM to have the opposition justify passing up on a game that I would otherwise have purchased. In other words, I really fucking hate that steering wheel. ;) Whereas Adam is saying "I hate that steering wheel, but I'm willing to buy the car with the steering wheel I hate anyhow and just hope it doesn't catch on, because I want to drive the car."

No, his purchase does not directly endorse the steering wheel, but it still rewards the car's designer financially. And if the car succeeds, it seems a dicey proposition to assume anything other than that other designers will notice their design choices and follow suit - steering wheel potentially included.

Tortured metaphor over. :p

Hahahaha. It is sort of a bad metaphor and sorry for bringing it into the discussion I am tired and its late;)
Actually fuck that...you did a damn good job now that I read it again.
I am proud of that sucker now!

Edit: I for one am heading to bed. With my wife who thankfully does not have restrictive DRM. Hence why I purchased her;) Enjoy all! Thanks as always for the discussion.

[Hawkzombie]

Karak, you're entirely right. I am opposed enough to the DRM to have the opposition justify passing up on a game that I would otherwise have purchased. In other words, I really fucking hate that steering wheel. ;) Whereas Adam is saying "I hate that steering wheel, but I'm willing to buy the car with the steering wheel I hate anyhow and just hope it doesn't catch on, because I want to drive the car."

No, his purchase does not directly endorse the steering wheel, but it still rewards the car's designer financially. And if the car succeeds, it seems a dicey proposition to assume anything other than that other designers will notice their design choices and follow suit - steering wheel potentially included.

Tortured metaphor over. :p

I gotta agree...I think that's a great metaphor.

[Adam Blue]

Whereas Adam is saying "I hate that steering wheel, but I'm willing to buy the car with the steering wheel I hate anyhow and just hope it doesn't catch on, because I want to drive the car."

Eh, to a point. The steering wheel is too much a large part of the car to compare it to DRM in this sense. Like I said, if the boycott works, then I'm on board. I can throw away my moral dilemma knowing there were many devs that put tons of sweat into this product.

I'm not buying the product in hopes that everyone else won't. That's just accusing me of being lazy and hypocritical. By boycotting you're actually the one sitting back hoping something works out.

For the record, I haven't bought any of these DRM'd games.

[H.Bogard]

That makes no sense. So, if my car get's stolen, I shouldn't get worked-up about it, because it'll probably be recovered by the police eventually? DRM isn't nearly so extreme, of course, but saying I ought not to get worked-up or boycott a game because the DRM will eventually get cracked anyway is utter bullshit.

The fact that the DRM screws the legitimate customer more than the pirate is all the information you need when it comes to taking a stance on DRM. Sure, I could get around it, but I shouldn't have to. I should be able to pop in the game, install it and play without worry of being online or my internet connection dropping or what have you.

Some reviewers of the PC version have been tweeting about how the game gives 'connection lost - reconnecting' ish messages every 10 seconds during play.

Yeah, if I cared, I'd definitely find the pirated version very temping. With the DRM, I wouldn't buy this game even for $10 legit.

[Talanvor]

If I'm going to play AC2, it's probably going to be a rental for the PS3 or some really cheap used copy.

It makes me sad too, since I enjoyed the first game a lot. Then Ubi decided that all of their legit PC customers needed to get screwed hard and released that DRM abomination. I don't know if a boycott works or not, I can't think of one working so far in gaming. Maybe ET for Atari?

Still, I'm not giving my money to Ubi for pulling this bullshit. They should not be rewarded for their efforts.

[J Arcane]

They should not be rewarded for their efforts.

Exactly. I'm not organizing anything that can be called a "boycott", I'm just not going to personally reward them financially for this asinine behavior, and I find questionable those who recognize the behavior for what it is but persist in rewarding them anyway.

I never joined the MW2 boycott group, but you won't see that one on my Steam list anywhere either.

[BigJonno]

I just wish there was a way of comparing the number of people who didn't buy it because of the DRM to the number of people who bought it because there wasn't a cracked version available to download.

[Nura]

I would have bought all three games (AC2, Settlers7 and the upcoming Splinter Cell: Conviction) had it not been for the DRM. so yeah, I know it's not much, but Ubisoft lost three sales to me by using that DRM, and it's staying that way.

[c0m3d14n]

rant part:
i agree 100% with j's angry post ;)
i did not buy cod6 or ac2, with ac2 it was not difficult because i found 1 boring and got bored with playing ac2 on my roommates ps3 after 1 hour.
i was really looking forward to cod6 though, but i refuse to give lying asshats my money. there are 10 other games out there that i enjoy, which dont arrive with a jar of lube, for every game that tries to somehow fuck the costumer.
the only thing these games do is ensure i wont be buying another game from these publishers/developers until they convince me to do otherwise.
i did not buy ea games for a while, but they changed their ways to a point and i am happy to enjoy their titles again.

important part here:
sure theses companys might not care if i buy their game or not, but that is not the point. the point is if i can justify for myself giving money to a company that actively tries to diminish my gaming experience and by doing that saying to them that i am not opposed enough to withhold my money, paving the way for even more ridiculous measures probably by even more companys.

[Ancalagon]

I think you only need to look at some responses to DRM backlashes to see that boycotting can work, depending on the context and company. BioShock and I think Mass Effect 1 are two games that had DRM... err reduced because of the backlash.

DRM is becoming more and more of an issue, and I would think if enough people start to boycott products because of it, the dip in sales would become noticeable, and the powers that be might try to correct it. Sadly, with most sales being on console these days, they dont have as much incentive.

Even if my boycotting a certain game does nothing, I will still boycott it. The only (extremely bad analogy) that I can think of right now is a vegetarian boycotting meat. You know that cows will still be killed, but at least they wont be killed on account of you. Or something.

[menage]

So now Capcom apparntly installed an online DRM (http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/news/54428/Capcom-Experiments-With-Always-On-Internet-DRM-On-) on their Final Fight game on the PS3??? To counter the "rampant gamesharing" that's been going on.

Not sure how it works exactly, but if it means not being able to play my games when my internet is down they can forget me buying anymore games that feature the damn thing. Great going Capcom, I almost never share anything., so fuck you too.

[Hotcod]

What you need to understand is that the group of gamers that understands DRM and the idea of a boycott to stop DRM is such a small part of the market. So small, and this of course by fact if you look at sales, that a boycott cannot work.

Numbers and proof please. The underpinning of your argument is boycotts don't work, the underpinning of mine is that might. Mine does not require as much proof as yours so until you can provide me with the number of "informed" gamers who dislike DRM and the percentage impact that group not buying the game would have then you argument is invalid and as every one else has pointed out your logic inconsistent. Even if they only seem 1 or 2 % drop in game sales due to informed gamers making a choice not to pay to get screwed over time across all the games that 1 or 2 % is significant and could produce the impact I've said. Again you seem to be working under this idea that an huge chunk of the sales have to go over night for not buying the games to be effective which is again is naive.

[roboninja]

I'm not buying the product in hopes that everyone else won't. That's just accusing me of being lazy and hypocritical. By boycotting you're actually the one sitting back hoping something works out.

Not sitting back hoping something works out. I really do not care. Ubi decided to go down this road. I decided to say fuck them, and keep my money in my pocket. The "drama" ends there. I really don't give a flying fuck if they ever change. I just know I will not be buying games that implement this type of DRM, no matter how "wicked awesome" they are purported to be.

[Panthera]

Back to the car analogy, it's more like: Would you buy a car that came with a breathalyzer ignition interlock?

[Exodus]

I rented this game for a week and I just want to make it clear that it is about 88% better than the first game. It is a good game.

I just made that percentage up but it is a hell of a lot better.

Yes, I just lawyered myself.

[jpublic]

God. I agree with you guys, and it's making me feel guitly for even *having* the game, even though I didn't buy it.

[CappinCanuck]

Back to the car analogy, it's more like: Would you buy a car that came with a breathalyzer ignition interlock?

Off Topic because I'm passing over the analogy... but I totally would buy a car with a breathalyzer :D

Anyway, I skimmed most of the posts. My opinion is that it doesn't matter if boycotts work or not, it's X amount of money the company didn't get. How much it affects it is irrelevant. Hopefully it's enough to affect a behavioural change, but it might not be. I'm ok with them just losing some money. This is probably a post that belonged on page 1 or 2 but I'm not getting any more into it than that :D

[Karak]

Off Topic because I'm passing over the analogy... but I totally would buy a car with a breathalyzer :D

Anyway, I skimmed most of the posts. My opinion is that it doesn't matter if boycotts work or not, it's X amount of money the company didn't get. How much it affects it is irrelevant. Hopefully it's enough to affect a behavioural change, but it might not be. I'm ok with them just losing some money. This is probably a post that belonged on page 1 or 2 but I'm not getting any more into it than that :D
:0

I think thats the most logical conclusion is that no one knows. With games breaking and becoming so popular, it is not a static market and if they lose 1 to DRM but gain one due to the growth in games...ug. Its just impossible to measure right now if boycotting works.
So as you said, it just falls into personal choice. What happens however, is that people post choice as fact and that is where the arguments start.

[LongStepMantis]

Just don't buy or play games with restrictive DRM, ever. Period.

There are enough games out there that never playing one, several, or dozens, won't affect me in the least. The problem with the failure that was the MW boycott and many others are that when push comes to shove, too many gamers seem to act like they must play X game. If they don't get what they wanted, they still buy it anyway and say "Man, these assholes made it harder for me to enjoy this!" *plays game*
No, you don't need to play it. But whatever helps them rationalize their bullshit, have at it.

[Dukefrukem]

I wish that were true. You are getting nothing out of this strategy though.

I absolutely am. I'm not playing games... that frees up time to play OTHER games. Or read a book.

1 person can make a difference. I also recycle.

[Dukefrukem]

I'm not fucking interested in affecting change when I refused to buy things like Ass Creed II.

I'm interested in my fucking money not going to fucking douchebags who hate me and want to make my gameplaying as unfun and obnoxious as possible.

And further more, even if, as you say, my and other's decision not to buy has no effect (an accusation I deny, BTW, given it's Steam performance thus far), how is it any fucking more helpful to GIVE THEM MONEY FOR THIS SHIT?

That's not how capitalism works, man. The only vote in the market is that of your wallet. If you pay money for shit like COD6 and Ass Creed II, you are sending the only message that these companies care about: that you will give them your money regardless.

That's the argument for being a fucking sheep, and I refuse to behave like that, and I refuse to send the signal to these companies that I will just bend over and take shit like this.

By all means, keep throwing them your fucking money, but mine stays in my pocket, and I'll continue to laugh every time they up the ante and people like you wonder why.

I like this post.

[Kelegacy]

That's what boycotts represent--you go without for the greater good or for a principle. If I boycott Ben and Jerry's because they decide to use genetically enhanced milk and then someone says, "Yeah, but now you can't eat Ben and Jerry's," I'd say "DUH!"

Consumers nowadays are too much like sheep to organize a successful boycott. They need it, gotta have it, now. That MW2 boycott is a great example.

[Dukefrukem]

I still haven't played MW2 and I probably never will because it will be $60 for the next year until COD7 comes out... That will at least be $50 because it's not an IW product.

I won't by AC2 on PC. And I won't buy Splinter Cell Conviction because it too is sixty-fuckin-dollars.

[Adam Blue]

Consumers nowadays are too much like sheep to organize a successful boycott. They need it, gotta have it, now. That MW2 boycott is a great example.

This. Until there's some effort put into it, don't expect change.

[Karak]

That's what boycotts represent--you go without for the greater good or for a principle. If I boycott Ben and Jerry's because they decide to use genetically enhanced milk and then someone says, "Yeah, but now you can't eat Ben and Jerry's," I'd say "DUH!"

Consumers nowadays are too much like sheep to organize a successful boycott. They need it, gotta have it, now. That MW2 boycott is a great example.

Correct.
But then again, I can easily count 7 of my friends who had no clue whatsoever that there was an issue with MW2. It looked awesome in commercials, their systems would play it, it looked fun as hell...so they bought it. Are they sheep, of course not. HOWEVER, it would be nice if Publishers stated on their commercials what DRM was being used. But that will never happen.

Now people who buy after saying they won't that's another thing. It's personal choice that they changed. *shrugs* Holding some kind of evil hate for them seems a bit...over the top. At least in the game realm.

Also is that true about Ben and Jerry's? I had never heard that. It doesn't bother me but I never heard that. Weirdness. What the hell does genetically enhanced milk offer...?
EDIT:OK I now see that they don't and what you were saying. Missed a word in your sentence.

[Kelegacy]

Also is that true about Ben and Jerry's? I had never heard that. It doesn't bother me but I never heard that. Weirdness. What the hell does genetically enhanced milk offer...?

Haha, no, no. Don't worry. I was using that as something that would bother me if they did change it. Ben and Jerry's has a pledge not to use milk from cows with artificial growth hormones like most quality dairy sellers.

My wife refuses to buy Wal-Mart generic milk though. That doesn't have a label that it's not from modified cows. There was a story once that linked a little girl's breasts growing or something weird at a really really young age--or she got some sort of breast cancer, I can't remember. My wife won't even think about it, so we mostly buy Hood.

[J Arcane]

Ugh. I really hate to address this tangent, but technically speaking all cows are genetically modified. The original species all modern cows derive from doesn't even exist on it's own anymore.

[Ravenlock]

This. Until there's some effort put into it, don't expect change.

What's funny here is that you say "This.", but Kel's message is "You boycott something because you disagree with it and are willing to live without it to make a point, not because the boycott is guaranteed to change anything", while yours seems to be "boycotts can't work so people might as well buy things even if they disagree with them."

From his POV as stated, you seem to be part of the problem. ;)

[Ancalagon]

Its a pity that some... well meaning organisation doesnt have the money to pay for an advertising slot somewhere on prime time TV, where they give you a quick run down on what DRM is and which games have it bad. Pretty much all games have it in some form or fashion, but some have it worse than others.

Just an informative advert that lays out the real world implications of it. Not ZOMG its a virus, but just that, in case you didnt know, you need to be connected 24/7. Some people just wouldnt know. I think if more people knew about DRM they would buy less PC games.

That or... we hire a spin doctor to invent a rumour that DRM companies put their money into legislation that will ban the private ownership of guns.

[J Arcane]

If only the ECA had actually been that organization, instead of a glorified bait-and-switch discount scheme.

[Karak]

Just an informative advert that lays out the real world implications of it. Not ZOMG its a virus, but just that, in case you didnt know, you need to be connected 24/7. Some people just wouldnt know. I think if more people knew about DRM they would buy less PC games.


This is what I too have wished for. I don't want them to buy less PC games however, it would just be nice if the advert was so good Publishers panicked a bit and removed their plans for DRM.

[Adam Blue]

What's funny here is that you say "This.", but Kel's message is "You boycott something because you disagree with it and are willing to live without it to make a point, not because the boycott is guaranteed to change anything", while yours seems to be "boycotts can't work so people might as well buy things even if they disagree with them."

From his POV as stated, you seem to be part of the problem. ;)

I already explained this POV to you...I personally don't care about making a point with my emotions since it doesn't physically do anything. I'm more of a man of action, so a simple unorganized boycott just to express my feelings doesn't do anything for me. I don't care if people pirate, just like I don't care if DRM has to be created because of it. It's a cause and effect.

And that's the core of DRM. People are pirating games. If pirating wasn't such an issue, this wouldn't be either. This is why I have such a light approach to DRM. People are stealing games when they know it's illegal and, unless there are numbers to prove otherwise, publishers lose out. Now, I'll take their word for it only because stealing typically means a loss.

If someone can prove me otherwise, that'll be great. I'm having a hard time finding this info.

So, to summarize so the same points aren't being brought up against mine: I don't care that people pirate, but because of cause and effect DRM is an outcome. So for that I don't care. Since I don't have a moral dilemma about piracy, I don't have a moral dilemma against a publisher for DRM.

Any boycott would be based on a stance of morals since they don't physically work. Since I don't give a shit about expressing my stance emotionally, I know that by DRM running its course, things will eventually work out since gamers can't get together and organize a prior action (see MW2...the market I speak of).

[AntonB]

Awesome. Off to the torrent sites I go. Thanks for the heads up.

[c0m3d14n]

I already explained this POV to you...

this will not work out... that is, will not work out in any positive way for the consumer...
for you as consumer it is irrelevant that there are pirates... you are inconvenienced because of the pirates, who should be the only ones that are targeted.
so you pay the company to be inconvenienced...

secondly, i dont have any numbers or studies or whatever, but in every thread about pirating you read that pirated games does not equal lost sales because the pirates would not buy the game in most cases.

finally, i dont know exaclty, because we have no big used games market here, but isnt drm also aimed at that to some extent?

[Hemalin]

secondly, i dont have any numbers or studies or whatever, but in every thread about pirating you read that pirated games does not equal lost sales because the pirates would not buy the game in most cases.

But the publishers have numbers, and those numbers are never wrong. (http://www.colonyofgamers.com/cogforums/showthread.php?t=16858)

[Karmakin]

Most people/orgs don't do nearly enough investigation into the piracy culture to know what's going on. Those numbers are flat out laughable.

Think of a substantial portion of "pirate" activity as being a version of say Folding@Home or SETI or something like that. The game isn't the game being downloaded. It's the number of times you can upload it. The modern pirate world is one of ratios and download/upload speeds and membership in exclusive communities. This isn't always the case...movies have a very high "pirate to viewership" rate, but the damage isn't happening in theaters, it's happening to rental stores.

Frankly, I can't lose too much sleep about that :)