The Needles: You Only Have Yourself To Blame

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

The Needles: You Only Have Yourself To Blame

Ubisoft may have loaded the gun but you, dear gamer, pulled the trigger, so maybe it's time to stop crying about how unfair it is when it goes off in your face.

Read Full Article

I agree 100%. While I'm not about to place the blame for what happened anywhere but at Ubisoft's feet, it's the gamers' own fault for being affected by Ubisoft's mistakes.

If you're paying to support and stimulate Ubisoft's retarded schemes, you deserve to reap the consequences. For better or worse.

Sure, quite a few PC gamers are aware of some form of DRM. But I wouldn't say that most are aware it exists, or are even aware just what games it comes packaged in. You can't necessarily blame the consumer, some people very likely buy these games and have no knowledge of what DRM is, exactly. In any case, it's no excuse to shift the blame from Ubisoft, as regardless of what platform we wish to enjoy our games on, they are the ones shoving this bullshit down our throats. That's like saying it's the victims fault for getting shot for being in the store when it got robbed.

Well, piracy is to blame for this... but not all gamers are stealing games. They should try to find a better way than making gamers hate them. They have now personally challenged hackers to break their code. Nice.

Hurr Durr Derp:
I agree 100%. While I'm not about to place the blame for what happened anywhere but at Ubisoft's feet, it's the gamers' own fault for being affected by Ubisoft's mistakes.

If you're paying to support and stimulate Ubisoft's retarded schemes, you deserve to reap the consequences. For better or worse.

Some people are just totally ignorant like that.
*cough MW2 boycott steam group cough*

If they want to show Ubisoft that this shit won't fly then they shouldn't have bought the game; simple as that. No game, no matter how awesome, is worth a system that intrusive and retarded. It's why I'm one of all the 18 people who ACTUALLY haven't bought MW2. Yes, I will stop labouring that example now.

The majority of PC gamers should have heard of this DRM scheme, and they still went out and bought the game. Ubisoft is very much wrong here and I don't think I'll ever buy another Ubisoft-published game again if they keep this up, but the gamers who STILL got the PC version even knowing the bullshit they'd land themselves in have no right to complain.

On the opposite end of the scale, for those people who didn't hear about this and were caught off-guard; they deserve to be able to drive up to Ubisoft HQ and blast the building with a giant laser-canon or something.

Yopaz:
Well, piracy is to blame for this... but not all gamers are stealing games. They should try to find a better way than making gamers hate them. They have now personally challenged hackers to break their code. Nice.

Something they in fact did on the very first day.

I haven't purchased AC2, nor will I. I don't download pirated games. Nor, as a gamer, will I shoulder any of the blame for what's occurred.

I call it just deserts - for both Ubisoft and those who bought AC2. I hope it drives the game's sales into the ground.

I live with a lot of DRM. I buy games from Steam. I put up with activation limits. Ubisoft stepped over the line.

uppitycracker:
Sure, quite a few PC gamers are aware of some form of DRM. But I wouldn't say that most are aware it exists, or are even aware just what games it comes packaged in. You can't necessarily blame the consumer, some people very likely buy these games and have no knowledge of what DRM is, exactly. In any case, it's no excuse to shift the blame from Ubisoft, as regardless of what platform we wish to enjoy our games on, they are the ones shoving this bullshit down our throats. That's like saying it's the victims fault for getting shot for being in the store when it got robbed.

I think Andy was fairly clear that he's not talking to those folks who genuinely got blindsided by this, which, undoubtedly, many people did. He's specifically referencing those who went into the situation knowing the inherent risks, then shouted to the heavens when the servers went down.

Also, it's not about shifting blame, but rather than owning up to one's share of it. I don't think anyone is arguing that Ubisoft's DRM is anything other than onerous.

PopcornAvenger:
I haven't purchased AC2, nor will I. I don't download pirated games. Nor, as a gamer, will I shoulder any of the blame for what's occurred.

I call it just deserts - for both Ubisoft and those who bought AC2. I hope it drives the game's sales into the ground.

As do I. The gamers who bought the PC version of AC2 (knowing what they were getting) can enjoy their wet-cardboard, wallpaper-paste, dung and cyanide sandwiches. Ubisoft I can only hope, as you said, have their sales driven into the ground so hard that it makes everything around it resemble the surface of the moon.

As for the gamers who were caught off-guard somehow... they have every right to complain and order an artillery strike on Ubisoft HQ.

The gamers who make an active decision to avoid the DRM by not buying the game are indeed the clever ones. However, it won't be the entire market that will be aware of what kind of DRM was in the box; they'll be aware of DRM and what it stands for, but not all of them have the same watchful eyes that we do.
How many people that buy pre-owned games are aware that none of the money they're spending has gone to the people that made it?

Susan Arendt:

uppitycracker:
Sure, quite a few PC gamers are aware of some form of DRM. But I wouldn't say that most are aware it exists, or are even aware just what games it comes packaged in. You can't necessarily blame the consumer, some people very likely buy these games and have no knowledge of what DRM is, exactly. In any case, it's no excuse to shift the blame from Ubisoft, as regardless of what platform we wish to enjoy our games on, they are the ones shoving this bullshit down our throats. That's like saying it's the victims fault for getting shot for being in the store when it got robbed.

I think Andy was fairly clear that he's not talking to those folks who genuinely got blindsided by this, which, undoubtedly, many people did. He's specifically referencing those who went into the situation knowing the inherent risks, then shouted to the heavens when the servers went down.

Also, it's not about shifting blame, but rather than owning up to one's share of it. I don't think anyone is arguing that Ubisoft's DRM is anything other than onerous.

That's true, but I think having paid for the game the affected gamers were well within their rights to go onto the ubi forums and start raising some hell. You can expect and inevitable disaster, but when it actually occurs you are still going to be overwhelmingly pissed off, regardless of whether you saw it coming or not.

Susan Arendt:

uppitycracker:
Sure, quite a few PC gamers are aware of some form of DRM. But I wouldn't say that most are aware it exists, or are even aware just what games it comes packaged in. You can't necessarily blame the consumer, some people very likely buy these games and have no knowledge of what DRM is, exactly. In any case, it's no excuse to shift the blame from Ubisoft, as regardless of what platform we wish to enjoy our games on, they are the ones shoving this bullshit down our throats. That's like saying it's the victims fault for getting shot for being in the store when it got robbed.

I think Andy was fairly clear that he's not talking to those folks who genuinely got blindsided by this, which, undoubtedly, many people did. He's specifically referencing those who went into the situation knowing the inherent risks, then shouted to the heavens when the servers went down.

Also, it's not about shifting blame, but rather than owning up to one's share of it. I don't think anyone is arguing that Ubisoft's DRM is anything other than onerous.

i see what yer saying, and i agree to a certain degree, but the owning up to ones share of it just doesn't necessarily make sense to me. i dunno, i just have a hard time keeping up the mentality that the consumer should have to own up to it at all. it's an interesting perspective, but one i just can't agree with.

Yopaz:
Well, piracy is to blame for this... but not all gamers are stealing games. They should try to find a better way than making gamers hate them. They have now personally challenged hackers to break their code. Nice.

True. The problem is they are currently trying to target everyone...with the idea what is good for the goose is good for the gander...and its a shame really as we are all not to blame for what is going on...I just wish they would realise this and actually come up with a method that does not punish everyone

In this day and age, if the failure of Ubisoft's DRM caught you by surprise, then I would agree that you don't really have any right to be surprised - you do however have the right to be angry.

If you buy a product that says "Warning: This product will probably explode in your face" and when it does, get angry about it, you're pretty much a moron. If you buy a product that industry analysts warn "looks explosive", but which purports to be perfectly safe, and then it explodes, you shouldn't really be surprised but you darn well better be angry.

This is what it boils down to - Ubisoft did not clearly indicate that "by opening and installing this product you acknowledge that you may have service interrupted at any time because our servers are a piece of shit", ergo anyone who bought their games gets to be angry when that happens. It doesn't matter if everyone on the internet predicted it, the point is Ubisoft told us everything was going to be just fine and then it wasn't.

I don't have much personal sympathy for the people getting locked out of Assassin's Creed 2, as I consider them weak for not taking a stand on principle and boycotting the hell out of Ubisoft forever and ever (amen), but I'm not going to be arrogant enough to suggest they're culpable in this whole fiasco. They are the victims - shame on you Andy.

I am not upset because of the DRM. I am upset because Ubisoft treats pc users like crap. We're like the retarded and neglected son of the family. Or at least, that's what Ubisoft thinks.

Also the guy above me is absolutely right.

You kind of contradict your title within your article, but I think I kind of agree. I'm now planning on just getting it on 360, but it kind of feels like they've won if I do that.

Susan Arendt:

uppitycracker:
Sure, quite a few PC gamers are aware of some form of DRM. But I wouldn't say that most are aware it exists, or are even aware just what games it comes packaged in. You can't necessarily blame the consumer, some people very likely buy these games and have no knowledge of what DRM is, exactly. In any case, it's no excuse to shift the blame from Ubisoft, as regardless of what platform we wish to enjoy our games on, they are the ones shoving this bullshit down our throats. That's like saying it's the victims fault for getting shot for being in the store when it got robbed.

I think Andy was fairly clear that he's not talking to those folks who genuinely got blindsided by this, which, undoubtedly, many people did. He's specifically referencing those who went into the situation knowing the inherent risks, then shouted to the heavens when the servers went down.

Also, it's not about shifting blame, but rather than owning up to one's share of it. I don't think anyone is arguing that Ubisoft's DRM is anything other than onerous.

What would you have them do instead? Sure, there are soccer moms who bought AC2 for their kids not knowing the included Clusterfuck™ DRM, but those are the minority. Many gamers also bought AC2 because they like it, and wanted to play with it, and yes, they were probably aware of DRM, but what other choice they had? Either buy it, DRM and all, or pirate the shit out of it.

You can't blame the honest customers for a failure on the publisher's part. Most of them bought AC2 and other Clusterfuck™-ed games very well aware of they are getting into, but what else could they do? Either put up with it, or not play (or pirate it, yes, but that's not the point here). This entire shitstorm is Ubisoft's fault, for putting a shitty DRM on their games AND the failure to live up to their promises of maintaining server availability. Shit got hacked, so what, it's not the customer's fault, it's Ubi's fault, they should go and fix it, the players had no share in that whatsoever. So, no, I disagree with sharing the responsibility of Ubi's mistakes, it's their shit, and no one else's. The players who bought the game and were totally unable to play it because of Ubi's failure have every right to be angry, they payed fucking money for the right to play and now it's taken from them without any tangible reason whatsoever. Of course they are angry and I don't blame them.

Hmm, this entire Ubisoft DRM thing is giving me HL2/Steam launch flashbacks.

Anyway, on topic, Ubisoft's aggressive DRM system was doomed to fail, and if you didn't see it coming as an experienced gamer, you're either naive or stupid. Still, I can see a lot of less experienced customers fall for this kind of scheme, not really knowing what they're getting themselves into. These people are the real victims and have every right to complain to Ubisoft.

In the end, this is the kind of thing that makes me choose the console version of a game over the PC version *sigh*

PopcornAvenger:
I haven't purchased AC2, nor will I. I don't download pirated games. Nor, as a gamer, will I shoulder any of the blame for what's occurred.

I call it just deserts - for both Ubisoft and those who bought AC2. I hope it drives the game's sales into the ground.

I live with a lot of DRM. I buy games from Steam. I put up with activation limits. Ubisoft stepped over the line.

This is what I think to, I was planning on buying AC2 when it came out for my computer, then heard about the DRM and that kept me away from any new Ubisoft game that is coming out with it. But I do have to say I did feel rather good when I heard that the server was brought down twice in a week, because that was one epic fail on their part.

I'm also inclined to think that gamers savvy enough to go to the Ubisoft forums to wail about the injustices of the universe should also be savvy enough to consider DRM before buying games.

So using an internet forum somehow makes some savvy? I don't see the logic here. Being an active member of a gaming forum probably means you are savvy. But joining a forum just to complain about your game not working the way Ubisoft said it would does not strike me as savvy as all. I'm betting a lot of them joined to complain about their game not working, which seems like a valid reason to join a forum. I really doubt many people who heard about all of this drama would have bought the game. Some might have ignored it, thinking that Ubisoft would know how to properly manage the DRM they are implementing, in which case it's still Ubisoft's fault.

I just don't see how this is the consumer's fault at all. Ubisoft claimed that the DRM would work fine. Some people had faith in this statement. Maybe they are foolish, but I don't see how this means they have no right to complain. All of the blame here belongs to Ubisoft. That's the way I see it. I don't see how it's fair to berate a someone who pays for their product and expects it to actually work.

i dont know why but i get the feeling that in later news we are going to see a bunch of legal action from ubi against 100 kids who are attacking the server...

was this some kind of "troy horse" scheme?? did they knew the servers would be attacked?? are they going to make an example of the people attacking the servers??

who knows, but i hope DRM goes away... or at least its replaced with something more functional

Interesting point. I personally believe that the PC Gaming community should have spoken up louder against this form of DRM. Most gamers sit idle when they hear news such as EA announcing this type of DRM. Instead of taking action, they wait until catastrophe (inevitably) strikes, then post on forums all over the internet. This occurs after EA can do any significant changes to the DRM. I'm not saying that the forum posters are wrong, but being proactive far surpasses post-action complaining. I look forward to playing Conviction, but with the recent purchase of my 360 Elite and this news, I will forgo my PC roots for the capability of playing the game without Big Brother watching over my shoulder. Hopefully PC Gamers will get their act together next time and force developers and publishers to use less obtrusive and, frankly, more effective DRM.

When I read the title I was ready to get my rage hat on, but upon reading the article I actually fully agree with you. As a PC gamer you've ALWAYS had to be a little more on the ball about things that console gamers did not.

You have to make sure the games will run on your system, for example. You also have to be wary about what you're buying because unlike consoles, you can't return or trade in your PC games - you're stuck with them forever. For this reason I always felt that to be a PC gamer you had to be a bit more connected to the goings on of the industry and now with DRM it's a double whammy. I really dislike install limits and Ubisofts always on thing is about a million times worse, so before I buy a game I check if either of those DRM schemes are used. It's not really that difficult, and if they have them I simply don't buy the game. I don't pirate the game either, I just avoid it and pretend it doesn't exist.

spartan_0214:
Interesting point. I personally believe that the PC Gaming community should have spoken up louder against this form of DRM. Most gamers sit idle when they hear news such as EA announcing this type of DRM. Instead of taking action, they wait until catastrophe (inevitably) strikes, then post on forums all over the internet. This occurs after EA can do any significant changes to the DRM. I'm not saying that the forum posters are wrong, but being proactive far surpasses post-action complaining. I look forward to playing Conviction, but with the recent purchase of my 360 Elite and this news, I will forgo my PC roots for the capability of playing the game without Big Brother watching over my shoulder. Hopefully PC Gamers will get their act together next time and force developers and publishers to use less obtrusive and, frankly, more effective DRM.

are you kidding me? Look at what happened to Spore. Amazon had the game rated at 1 star, EA started banning people from their forums who made posts about DRM. Even worse, they banned their EA accounts so any games they linked to their EA accounts were essentially gone. Regardless there were tons of posts everywhere, news articles, gaming groups, all raging about install limits. EA damn well knew what it was going into and so did Ubisoft.

Go onto the steam forum or the escapist or anywhere there's AC2 news and you'll see PAGES of threads about the DRM. The reason you don't see DRM threads on the publishers forum is because mods DELETE those threads.

Playbahnosh:

Susan Arendt:

uppitycracker:
Sure, quite a few PC gamers are aware of some form of DRM. But I wouldn't say that most are aware it exists, or are even aware just what games it comes packaged in. You can't necessarily blame the consumer, some people very likely buy these games and have no knowledge of what DRM is, exactly. In any case, it's no excuse to shift the blame from Ubisoft, as regardless of what platform we wish to enjoy our games on, they are the ones shoving this bullshit down our throats. That's like saying it's the victims fault for getting shot for being in the store when it got robbed.

I think Andy was fairly clear that he's not talking to those folks who genuinely got blindsided by this, which, undoubtedly, many people did. He's specifically referencing those who went into the situation knowing the inherent risks, then shouted to the heavens when the servers went down.

Also, it's not about shifting blame, but rather than owning up to one's share of it. I don't think anyone is arguing that Ubisoft's DRM is anything other than onerous.

What would you have them do instead? Sure, there are soccer moms who bought AC2 for their kids not knowing the included Clusterfuck™ DRM, but those are the minority. Many gamers also bought AC2 because they like it, and wanted to play with it, and yes, they were probably aware of DRM, but what other choice they had? Either buy it, DRM and all, or pirate the shit out of it.

You can't blame the honest customers for a failure on the publisher's part. Most of them bought AC2 and other Clusterfuck™-ed games very well aware of they are getting into, but what else could they do? Either put up with it, or not play (or pirate it, yes, but that's not the point here). This entire shitstorm is Ubisoft's fault, for putting a shitty DRM on their games AND the failure to live up to their promises of maintaining server availability. Shit got hacked, so what, it's not the customer's fault, it's Ubi's fault, they should go and fix it, the players had no share in that whatsoever. So, no, I disagree with sharing the responsibility of Ubi's mistakes, it's their shit, and no one else's. The players who bought the game and were totally unable to play it because of Ubi's failure have every right to be angry, they payed fucking money for the right to play and now it's taken from them without any tangible reason whatsoever. Of course they are angry and I don't blame them.

Odd that not buying the game isn't in your list of options.

Don't like the DRM? Don't buy the game. Period. Or, if you make the choice to deal with the DRM because you simply can't live without playing the game, then accept that you've made your choice.

I guess you can say that the people who bought Ubisoft games, and knew about the DRM behind it, had to be at least somewhat aware of the risk that it was going to fail. But I still believe that we are underestimating the ignorance of the general public.

Aside from that, though, there is still human nature involved. Why would the average gamer, one who is aware of the fact that he has to be connected continuously to Ubisoft's servers - and probably slightly annoyed by it - assume that Ubisoft is going to screw things up completely? Face it, they run a multi-million dollar business there. Speaking from the public mind, it is only fair to assume that they will provide the service you paid for, even though they do it in a ridiculous way.

What I'm trying to say here is that by nature, a person expects things to work the way they are supposed to. None of the PC gamers that bought Ubisoft's latest games, including the ones who had a notion of how the DRM worked, said to themselves "Well, I guess I saw that coming" when their game crashes and burns. I don't think you can blame them for how people work. Or don't work?

Wow so to be a PC gamer we now need to constantly check every site of every game to make sure that they aren't pulling something stupid? And if you don't you are to blame? SOrry I don't buy it. Now if it stated on the back/ side top or bottom of the box a quick explanation like "will require a constant internet connection and our servers to work to play" then yes you would have a point. You know for those people who have jobs and can't spend 24/7 surfing the web for every detail about an intended purchase.

Susan Arendt:

Playbahnosh:

Susan Arendt:

uppitycracker:
Sure, quite a few PC gamers are aware of some form of DRM. But I wouldn't say that most are aware it exists, or are even aware just what games it comes packaged in. You can't necessarily blame the consumer, some people very likely buy these games and have no knowledge of what DRM is, exactly. In any case, it's no excuse to shift the blame from Ubisoft, as regardless of what platform we wish to enjoy our games on, they are the ones shoving this bullshit down our throats. That's like saying it's the victims fault for getting shot for being in the store when it got robbed.

I think Andy was fairly clear that he's not talking to those folks who genuinely got blindsided by this, which, undoubtedly, many people did. He's specifically referencing those who went into the situation knowing the inherent risks, then shouted to the heavens when the servers went down.

Also, it's not about shifting blame, but rather than owning up to one's share of it. I don't think anyone is arguing that Ubisoft's DRM is anything other than onerous.

What would you have them do instead? Sure, there are soccer moms who bought AC2 for their kids not knowing the included Clusterfuck™ DRM, but those are the minority. Many gamers also bought AC2 because they like it, and wanted to play with it, and yes, they were probably aware of DRM, but what other choice they had? Either buy it, DRM and all, or pirate the shit out of it.

You can't blame the honest customers for a failure on the publisher's part. Most of them bought AC2 and other Clusterfuck™-ed games very well aware of they are getting into, but what else could they do? Either put up with it, or not play (or pirate it, yes, but that's not the point here). This entire shitstorm is Ubisoft's fault, for putting a shitty DRM on their games AND the failure to live up to their promises of maintaining server availability. Shit got hacked, so what, it's not the customer's fault, it's Ubi's fault, they should go and fix it, the players had no share in that whatsoever. So, no, I disagree with sharing the responsibility of Ubi's mistakes, it's their shit, and no one else's. The players who bought the game and were totally unable to play it because of Ubi's failure have every right to be angry, they payed fucking money for the right to play and now it's taken from them without any tangible reason whatsoever. Of course they are angry and I don't blame them.

Odd that not buying the game isn't in your list of options.

Don't like the DRM? Don't buy the game. Period. Or, if you make the choice to deal with the DRM because you simply can't live without playing the game, then accept that you've made your choice.

Exactly. Ubisoft knows exactly how we feel, they know we're all pissed off at this legendary grade of bullshit DRM. However, if the game still sells Ubisoft's upper management (the ones who make these decisions) won't care. If you want to let Ubisoft know how you feel bitch on the forums. If you want to SHOW them how you feel don't buy the game. Hell, don't buy any of their games - I know I won't be.

Here's a good article about their DRM: http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/21783.cfm

Although, I wonder if they 'believe' in their DRM still :)

Frankly, this is bollocks through and through. Not everyone has constant internet access (yeah, shocking but true). Cutting potential customers out of the loop just seems asinine to me. And - no matter what they say - are they going to keep the servers for all their products running indefinitely?

squid5580:
Now if it stated on the back/ side top or bottom of the box a quick explanation like "will require a constant internet connection and our servers to work to play" then yes you would have a point.

It does. Hell, it's even right on the steam store:

3rd-party DRM: Ubisoft's Online Services Platform. Ubisoft requires a permanent Internet connection to play this video game at all times.

And no, this isn't hidden away in some little fine print on the bottom of the store page, it's above the fold and in the "game details" section on the right which almost every steam user (I at least assume) checks.

AC10:

squid5580:
Now if it stated on the back/ side top or bottom of the box a quick explanation like "will require a constant internet connection and our servers to work to play" then yes you would have a point.

It does. Hell, it's even right on the steam store:

3rd-party DRM: Ubisoft’s Online Services Platform. Ubisoft requires a permanent Internet connection to play this video game at all times.

And no, this isn't hidden away in some little fine print on the bottom of the store page, it's above the fold and in the "game details" section on the right which almost every steam user (I at least assume) checks.

Fine that is great for Steam but how about a brick and mortar retail copy? And note the one very important piece of information lacking in that description. Nowhere does it say thier servers going down will effect your game. You just need an online connection.

Gamers need to step out of the dark ages. Games dont come with detailed instructions anymore? We need to demand them back.
Studios demand retarded efforts to keep piracy down?
Its up to us to stop that.

Nuff said.

With all this DRM talk...soon the Escapist will be above Wikipedia in Google searches for DRM!

We're not pissed at Ubisoft for making the game unplayable; we're pissed at Ubisoft for making the game worse. The game itself still outweighs the disadvantages of the DRM, so that's why we buy it. There was no need to limit the game in such a restrictive manner, hence the outcry.

Susan Arendt:

Playbahnosh:

Most of them bought AC2 and other Clusterfuck™-ed games very well aware of they are getting into, but what else could they do? Either put up with it, or not play (or pirate it, yes, but that's not the point here).

Odd that not buying the game isn't in your list of options.

Don't like the DRM? Don't buy the game. Period. Or, if you make the choice to deal with the DRM because you simply can't live without playing the game, then accept that you've made your choice.

It's in there, look!

Don't get me wrong, but your stance on this doesn't make any sense. Put up with the DRM and accept responsibility for it's failure or don't buy it? If there is a game you really wanna play, there is not much of choice there, isn't it?

Gamers shouldn't have to choose between not buying a game or getting on the wrong end of the sucked dick if they do. This is just wrong. Hell, these people actually pay for the game with real money. They should have the right to play the game whenever they damn well want to, and the company holding the DRM should be fucking maintaining their stupid servers, because that's what the players' paid for. If they are not doing that, they are literally robbing their customers.

Now, I'm not saying people who willingly paid money for a game like this, knowing the implications of the DRM, are totally home free in the matter. But expecting a company to live up to it's own end of the deal is only natural, since they are enforcing all kinds of crap on the player and are willing to sue the fuck out of them if they brake the rules. This should be true in reverse. I say, if the company breaks the rules, the players have all the fucking right to be enraged, and this case, this is what happened. It's not the players who came up with this fucking DRM scheme and it's not the players who promised it will work and promised to maintain the servers 24/7, it was Ubisoft. So if they are not living up to their end of the deal, it's not the player's fault. Period.

Gildan Bladeborn:
In this day and age, if the failure of Ubisoft's DRM caught you by surprise, then I would agree that you don't really have any right to be surprised - you do however have the right to be angry.

If you buy a product that says "Warning: This product will probably explode in your face" and when it does, get angry about it, you're pretty much a moron. If you buy a product that industry analysts warn "looks explosive", but which purports to be perfectly safe, and then it explodes, you shouldn't really be surprised but you darn well better be angry.

This is what it boils down to - Ubisoft did not clearly indicate that "by opening and installing this product you acknowledge that you may have service interrupted at any time because our servers are a piece of shit", ergo anyone who bought their games gets to be angry when that happens. It doesn't matter if everyone on the internet predicted it, the point is Ubisoft told us everything was going to be just fine and then it wasn't.

I don't have much personal sympathy for the people getting locked out of Assassin's Creed 2, as I consider them weak for not taking a stand on principle and boycotting the hell out of Ubisoft forever and ever (amen), but I'm not going to be arrogant enough to suggest they're culpable in this whole fiasco. They are the victims - shame on you Andy.

This is exactly how I feel about this article.

Also, the entire article had antagonistic tones towards the honest consumer, which were unjustly placed. It's their right as consumers to get mad when something like this happens, so instead of effectively telling them to shut up, we should be supporting them in the hopes that Ubi's crappy DRM never gets used again - if nobody is getting pissed at them, then they win.

squid5580:

AC10:

squid5580:
Now if it stated on the back/ side top or bottom of the box a quick explanation like "will require a constant internet connection and our servers to work to play" then yes you would have a point.

It does. Hell, it's even right on the steam store:

3rd-party DRM: Ubisoft’s Online Services Platform. Ubisoft requires a permanent Internet connection to play this video game at all times.

And no, this isn't hidden away in some little fine print on the bottom of the store page, it's above the fold and in the "game details" section on the right which almost every steam user (I at least assume) checks.

Fine that is great for Steam but how about a brick and mortar retail copy? And note the one very important piece of information lacking in that description. Nowhere does it say thier servers going down will effect your game. You just need an online connection.

I don't have a retail copy (as I said, I'm never buying this game). But yeah, the description doesn't state it Ubi's servers go offline. However, it's titled "Ubisoft's Online Services Platform" you should probably look up a DRM system you've never heard of.

But really, is steam supposed to cover EVERYTHING that could possibly go wrong with the DRM service (not to mention that Ubisoft itself writes the description). If a DRM needs to constantly have an internet connection you should SURELY be savvy enough to know it's talking to some server somewhere.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here