Assassin's Creed II - DRM requires *constant* internet connection..

[dangel]

http://www.computerandvideogames.com....php?id=235290

Yup, that's right - UBISoft have managed to build a DRM scheme so utterly retarded that you'll literally feel punished for buying the game (whilst pirates won't have to deal with it). To be clear, if you lose internet connection for ANY reason and ANY time you get booted out of the game and lose progress.

What idiot thought this up?

[oolon]

Guess I will not be getting settlers VII then, I played most of the settler games on my laptop when away from home, shame really. A company that goes the other way is egosoft who a year after the game comes out gives a DRM free update for registered users. Playing games is the one thing to do when your internet is NOT available! After all we have HeXus for when it is.

[usxhe190]

Yep. They really think customers are schmucks. I guess we just have to see who is right.

[chuckskull]

Shame, I was going to buy that...

[dangel]

Shame, I was going to buy that...

Same here - I loved the first one and it's supposed to be better. My only option is to wait to see if it's cracked, buy it and then play it without this insane restriction. The only problem with that is it sends the wrong message in that i'm accepting this DRM. Crap.

[Singh400]

Epic fail. Another easy ride for the pirates, while paying customers get shafted.

Is this just for the PC version or console versions too?

[snootyjim]

I'd imagine PC, since the console versions have been out a while.

With the others here, I was waiting to buy this.

*strikes off the list*

[Rob_B]

I'd imagine PC, since the console versions have been out a while.

With the others here, I was waiting to buy this.

*strikes off the list*

You're not missing much, same repetitive gameplay after a while, it just looks pretty (well, thats debatable on my console version) Then again I thought that of Arkham Asylum so my opinion isn't liked by most people

[GheeTsar]

*Takes off shopping list*

Sigh. Piracy is going to cripple the PC games industry.

[oolon]

*Takes off shopping list*

Sigh. Piracy is going to cripple the PC games industry.

No, attempts to fight it will. Not everyone is going to buy a product no matter how low a price, there reaches a point where attempts extract more sales end up reducing your existing ones. I think we are passing this point now. Also there is the cost envolved, "better" protection also costs more money for all sales not just the additional ones, it will be interesting to see if it reduces the profit margins.

What happens to the games when they turn the servers off? You have an expensive beer mat with a hole in it.

[snootyjim]

I know this is flogging a dead horse, but why on earth have Ubisoft done this?

Surely they are more than aware, as is anybody with even the vaguest understanding of PC gaming, that it is impossible to protect a single player game from being hacked. If people are capable of emulating a PS2 game in Windows, then there are certainly people out there who are capable of taking a game and removing all code that pertains to DRM.

So how on earth does this help? For the scene, trying to crack a game, it doesn't make a blind bit of difference whether the game requires an internet connection or not. All that code will be ripped out, so the way it goes about its business is completely irrelevant.

In conclusions then:

Scene don't give a toss, it's still the same old task - rip out all of the DRM code
Pirates don't give a toss, they'll play a DRM-free game with no restrictions
Paying customers are angry, they'll play a game with horrible restrictions

I think it's fairly obvious what that means.

[oolon]

Scene don't give a toss, it's still the same old task - rip out all of the DRM code
Pirates don't give a toss, they'll play a DRM-free game with no restrictions
Paying customers are angry, they'll play a game with horrible restrictions

Preventing casual copyright infringement as cheaply as possible is what they should be doing. Then making the game as good as they can so it gets lots of says, getting your product available on the market in all places at the same time also helps.

[Saracen]

This is another, and perhaps the worst, example of the mindset that's pretty much forced me to give up PC gaming.

As I've said before, I will not buy game that makes me jump through such hoops just to play the game I bought. I will not accept an internet connection as being required, and I will not accept having to validate with a server because if for whatever reason, that server is not available, I can't use the game I paid for. And that, I will not accept. Nor is some vague promise 5o "issue a patch" at some future point any use to me, even if I did believe it, which I don't, entirely.

Nor will I use the "patch" the pirate scene provides. I am not installing some code produced by such illicit sources on a machine which I use for things that are important to me because without taking the patch apart, I can't know what else it might be doing and that is a risk I'm won't take.

I fully support a company's right to protect it's IP and to expect to make profit from it's products without having the market wrecked by piracy, and I don't have a problem with buying games I want to play. What I have a problem with is, having paid, being held to ransom by onboxious and intrusive DRM.

And that's from someone that's been a gamer since the days of Battleships on an IBM mainframe in the '60s.

[Rob_B]

And that's from someone that's been a gamer since the days of Battleships on an IBM mainframe in the '60s.

Shame we're not allowed that sort of access now, I'm sure a Z10 could handle Crysis

[dangel]

Nor will I use the "patch" the pirate scene provides. I am not installing some code produced by such illicit sources on a machine which I use for things that are important to me because without taking the patch apart, I can't know what else it might be doing and that is a risk I'm won't take.

I'm starting to think it's the DRM that's more risky frankly! I've been using 'nocd' type patches for many years with zero issues - thankfully the pirates ego's are so large (and every 'patch' gets disassembled by their competitors in case they can 1-up themselves as a result - there's hundreds of examples of this in the 'nfo' files they release) that the chances of what you're suggesting are inextricably small. Need we bring up starforce to illustrate just how harmful 'officially' sourced DRM can be? Illicit is an interesting word, is DRM somehow better regulated because it's from a self interested party that you paid money too? Perhaps we can infer it's safety by the very fact there's pirates pulling it apart to find out how it works?
Oh what a sick little circle.

[shaithis]

Guess I will not be getting settlers VII then

Damn, I hope it's not included in Settlers as well.......else it will be off to the USENET to source my copy!