DRM Hell: AC2 PC sales and Ubisoft PC support ** DRM Discussion Here **

DRM has been tolerable so far. Except for Codemasters. I lost Dirt 2 because my gamertag on GFWL got hacked and Microsoft closed it down for me due to security reasons. Created a new GFWL tag, all games worked ok, except Dirt2 which is tied only to the gamertag it was registered too. Contacted Codemasters, and they stated that they don't reissue keys.
Currently going through Fair Trading and lawyers. Has cost me a bit over $900 in costs, for a $40 game. Why, because they need to be taught a lesson, that they are supposed to screw with pirates, not paying consumers.

DigiTM73

You should make an online petition asking fellow gamers for help and money to cover costs. You may be surprised at the response. I would help you if I could, I agree what Codemasters did was horrible. Thanks for the heads up on Dirt 2, it is on my wishlist.

It's ok provided you keep your GFWL gamertag forever. But now I think of it, this internet thing that Ubisoft is doing comes close to the same thing.

Once again legit paying customers get screwed.

Theres very few games i won't buy because of some reason or other when i was interested in it. But AC2, Settlers 7 and Splinter Cell have just lost a sale on both pc and console. I can't support something like this.

Once again legit paying customers get screwed.

Theres very few games i won't buy because of some reason or other when i was interested in it. But AC2, Settlers 7 and Splinter Cell have just lost a sale on both pc and console. I can't support something like this.

Ocid1

Not much to say about Ubisoft on these forums that won't get me modded. I will say that I havn't bought an Ubisoft game for years sense starforce I think it was called.

I wouldn't have bought it anyway but if I had concidered it I wouldn't now. I put up with DRM because I'm a PC gamer but if it continues down this road it will become too onerous to ignore. I will get a custom made eyepatch because as much as I hate pirating I hate this even more.

I realize it's not a solution so I probably won't but it feels good to say. These people are insane but as long as people keep buying the games it will continue.

Well, I may have to put up with it if I want Storms of War: Battle of Britain hard enough. I'll have to see the reviews on it first after release.

As long as people keep pirating, it will continue. chandu83

Ya think? As long as they making games there will be pirates. But if they chase away the paying customer with this garbage then there will only be pirates and then what? The decline of PC games will be attributed to piracy but the real reason will be DRM. It's a self fulfilling cause and effect.

Make the games with a disk check and maybe online activation. Leave it at that because the pirates will do what they do regardless.

Ridiculous! I was so set on buying Splinter Cell: Conviction until I heard this stupid DRM might be active on it. I'm sorry but I will not buy the it (which I'm stoked for) until a working crack is has been developed. My ISP had some severe server problems one time and none of their customers could access the internet for an entire month. A month... So what you're telling me in the middle of my level I get kicked off my SINGLE PLAYER game for not having internet, and can not continue until a month later? Granted that is a very rare occurence but a very probable one nonetheless. This is just absurd.

I used to like UBi for PC gaming online but pff i miss the old rainbow six games. They have gone more console freindly you see alot of 3rd person games coming from them. All i can is get AC2 on Console it looks much better then the first AC on PC.

[QUOTE="THGarrett"]

Sigh...the only people this is going to hurt are the people that pay for the game sadly. I honestly think Ubisoft is doing this on purpose so they drive down their PC sales to ground and have a reason to no longer support the PC and switch entirely to consoles.

Renevent42

because it has happened before.

its like a relationship. One side wants to break up with the other, but they want to do it guilt free. So they alienate the other person in the relationship until that person grows shallow and cold, and then they have a legitimate reason to end the relationship.

If Ubisoft pulled out now, they'd be burning a rather large crowd and this would look bad to their investors. If they drive PC sales down to the point where its not profitable first, then they can stop making games for the PC guilt-free.

Frankly Ive hated Ubisoft since the last Splinter Cell and Silent Hunter game. The fact that they acknowledged both games were broken, and clearly stated they did not want to fix them, speaks volumes for their lack of character, pride of product, and quality assurance.

because it has happened before.

its like a relationship. One side wants to break up with the other, but they want to do it guilt free. So they alienate the other person in the relationship until that person grows shallow and cold, and then they have a legitimate reason to end the relationship.

If Ubisoft pulled out now, they'd be burning a rather large crowd and this would look bad to their investors. If they drive PC sales down to the point where its not profitable first, then they can stop making games for the PC guilt-free.

Frankly Ive hated Ubisoft since the last Splinter Cell and Silent Hunter game. The fact that they acknowledged both games were broken, and clearly stated they did not want to fix them, speaks volumes for their lack of character, pride of product, and quality assurance.

mrbojangles25

Very well thought out. I didn't think of that myself but it makes tons of sense. The relationship analogy fits the bill I think.

[QUOTE="Renevent42"][QUOTE="THGarrett"]

Sigh...the only people this is going to hurt are the people that pay for the game sadly. I honestly think Ubisoft is doing this on purpose so they drive down their PC sales to ground and have a reason to no longer support the PC and switch entirely to consoles.

mrbojangles25

because it has happened before.

its like a relationship. One side wants to break up with the other, but they want to do it guilt free. So they alienate the other person in the relationship until that person grows shallow and cold, and then they have a legitimate reason to end the relationship.

If Ubisoft pulled out now, they'd be burning a rather large crowd and this would look bad to their investors. If they drive PC sales down to the point where its not profitable first, then they can stop making games for the PC guilt-free.

Frankly Ive hated Ubisoft since the last Splinter Cell and Silent Hunter game. The fact that they acknowledged both games were broken, and clearly stated they did not want to fix them, speaks volumes for their lack of character, pride of product, and quality assurance.

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

[QUOTE="Renevent42"] Why would they need to do that? They don't have to support the PC at all...they can wake up tomorrow and decide not to. I agree this decision is not good for consumers, but why pretend there's some sort of conspiracy behind it?Renevent42

because it has happened before.

its like a relationship. One side wants to break up with the other, but they want to do it guilt free. So they alienate the other person in the relationship until that person grows shallow and cold, and then they have a legitimate reason to end the relationship.

If Ubisoft pulled out now, they'd be burning a rather large crowd and this would look bad to their investors. If they drive PC sales down to the point where its not profitable first, then they can stop making games for the PC guilt-free.

Frankly Ive hated Ubisoft since the last Splinter Cell and Silent Hunter game. The fact that they acknowledged both games were broken, and clearly stated they did not want to fix them, speaks volumes for their lack of character, pride of product, and quality assurance.

the concept of business might be devoid of feelings, but the people makings the decisions have feelings, the people buying the product have feelings, etc.

I know my analogy was a bit dramatic, but its true. Just look at Microsoft. They essentially stopped all support for PC gaming (started with Halo 2 being VIsta only, then with dismal Gears of War sales, now Alan Wake wont come to PC because "our monitors are too small").

So, sure, in an ideal world business is not touched by feeling, but it is still affected by bullcrap and silly, stupid idea and notions by people with questionable motives.

If you make 2 billion a year profit off consoles, and 200 million off PC sales, and it costs you 100 million to make those PC sales, arent you going to take any excuse you can get to stop making PC games and divert that 100 million into some other area where you can see more profit? I know its only sound business tactics to do so, and I Dont blame any company for abandoning a non-profitable area, but just be straight up with us. And dont screw over the legit consumer

[QUOTE="Renevent42"][QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

because it has happened before.

its like a relationship. One side wants to break up with the other, but they want to do it guilt free. So they alienate the other person in the relationship until that person grows shallow and cold, and then they have a legitimate reason to end the relationship.

If Ubisoft pulled out now, they'd be burning a rather large crowd and this would look bad to their investors. If they drive PC sales down to the point where its not profitable first, then they can stop making games for the PC guilt-free.

Frankly Ive hated Ubisoft since the last Splinter Cell and Silent Hunter game. The fact that they acknowledged both games were broken, and clearly stated they did not want to fix them, speaks volumes for their lack of character, pride of product, and quality assurance.

mrbojangles25

the concept of business might be devoid of feelings, but the people makings the decisions have feelings, the people buying the product have feelings, etc.

I know my analogy was a bit dramatic, but its true. Just look at Microsoft. They essentially stopped all support for PC gaming (started with Halo 2 being VIsta only, then with dismal Gears of War sales, now Alan Wake wont come to PC because "our monitors are too small").

So, sure, in an ideal world business is not touched by feeling, but it is still affected by bullcrap and silly, stupid idea and notions by people with questionable motives.

If you make 2 billion a year profit off consoles, and 200 million off PC sales, and it costs you 100 million to make those PC sales, arent you going to take any excuse you can get to stop making PC games and divert that 100 million into some other area where you can see more profit? I know its only sound business tactics to do so, and I Dont blame any company for abandoning a non-profitable area, but just be straight up with us. And dont screw over the legit consumer

I'm sorry, what you are saying just sounds very naive. They don't care about "burning PC gamers"...it's either worth it or not to invest in a market. It seems like they are trying a last ditch effort to support the platform at the current moment. Misguided or not, they didn't invest however much money to develop/license this DRM scheme just to intentionally drive sales into the ground so they have an "excuse" so they don't hurt PC gamers' feelings. That's just utterly ridiculous...

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

[QUOTE="Renevent42"] When has it happened before? And I don't think your example makes much sense...sounds imaginary. Business is nothing like a relationship...in fact it's exactly opposite of a relationship. Business is not about feelings, it's about making money. If Ubisoft felt there was money to be made with ITS PRODUCTS in the PC market they would do it, I don't see them intentionally driving their sales into the ground. Renevent42

the concept of business might be devoid of feelings, but the people makings the decisions have feelings, the people buying the product have feelings, etc.

I know my analogy was a bit dramatic, but its true. Just look at Microsoft. They essentially stopped all support for PC gaming (started with Halo 2 being VIsta only, then with dismal Gears of War sales, now Alan Wake wont come to PC because "our monitors are too small").

So, sure, in an ideal world business is not touched by feeling, but it is still affected by bullcrap and silly, stupid idea and notions by people with questionable motives.

If you make 2 billion a year profit off consoles, and 200 million off PC sales, and it costs you 100 million to make those PC sales, arent you going to take any excuse you can get to stop making PC games and divert that 100 million into some other area where you can see more profit? I know its only sound business tactics to do so, and I Dont blame any company for abandoning a non-profitable area, but just be straight up with us. And dont screw over the legit consumer

I'm sorry, what you are saying just sounds very naive. They don't care about "burning PC gamers"...it's either worth it or not to invest in a market. It seems like they are trying a last ditch effort to support the platform at the current moment. Misguided or not, they didn't invest however much money to develop/license this DRM scheme just to intentionally drive sales into the ground so they have an "excuse" so they don't hurt PC gamers' feelings. That's just utterly ridiculous...

i see what youre saying, the point of my posts is that they have a reputation to keep, and if they want to keep that reputation they cant simply just say "We dont like making PC games any more". They gotta have a legit reason; this form of DRM is Ubisofts last attempt.

you problably right, I might be reading too much into this, but the simple fact is that publishers generally come out with lame excuse/attempt after another until eventually we are lucky enough to get one or two PC releases a year.

Either way, expect nothing but half-assed ports and alienating DRM out of Ubisoft from now on. Of course, I suppose this has been happening for years now but...

What I see/feel, is that the culture on PC forums takes everything that publishers/developers say as excuses, instead of looking at it from their point of view or simply from a a business perspective. "and if they want to keep that reputation they cant simply just say "We dont like making PC games any more". They gotta have a legit reason; this form of DRM is Ubisofts last attempt." Nah, they can just say it's not worth it for them anymore. and if it's not worth it to them, that's not an excuses anyways...it's a business decision. And realistically most gamers don't care about this stuff, and certainly the market they will concentrate on (consoles) wont care. How many console players will really care if Ubisoft stops supporting PC? Not many lol... If Ubisoft wanted out of the PC market they could do it tomorrow and still do gang-busters with their console sales...especially publishing games like AC2 and the other high selling games under their belt.Renevent42

1. Of course I can see it from their perspective; theyre sick and tired of people pirating their games. What you need to see is this: do they see it from our perspectrive? Do they realize how flaky internet connections are, how intrusive and annoying it is to legitimate buyers?

THe issue is not PC Gamers understanding the publisher; if Ubisoft would just grow some balls and say "Hey, guys, sorry...but we are sick and tired of being pirated, and it just isnt worth our time to make PC games" that would be fine. But instead we get this DRM.

2. Of course console gamers arent concerned...they dont game on PC (mostly). Why is the relevant to this argument? We are talking about Ubisoft PC publishing and DRM

3. Yes, I know they could still make a lot more money. But its borderline insulting what theyre doing. Theyre essentially saying "PC...youre not worth our while. But we do want that little bit of cash you give us. So we are gonna give this ooooone more try". Not to use the relationship analogy again (I know you hate that lol), but its like a guy and girl that were split for a week and got back together, only the guy isnt fully commited. He, and Ubisoft, are in it for shallow reasons.

Ubisoft had stupid DRM before - remember the Starforce fiasco back in 2005?

I heard this scheme, Ubisoft Orbit, is developed by Massive and it's based on Massgate's technology. That's pretty sad if true.

Ubisoft had stupid DRM before - remember the Starforce fiasco back in 2005?

I heard this scheme, Ubisoft Orbit, is developed by Massive and it's based on Massgate's technology. That's pretty sad if true.

Baranga

wow thats pretty awful if its true. And yea, I remember Ubisoft's prior attempts at DRM. There was a big fiasco where they released a whole bunch of faulty keys with the last Splinter Cell.

A little off topic here but I'm curious, someone stated the whole agreement thing when installing the game.

What if i buy the game for PC, unaware of this DRM security, the online activation etc, and i do not agree with it. Am i entitled to my money back, can i physically go back to the shop and tell the shop to give me my money back because i do not agree with what the developers are offering me here.

I know, in this country at least, you are not able to get a refund on a PC game if it will not run on your computer. Everytime i buy a game i am reminded by the shop attendant "Are you sure your computer can handle this, because you cannot refund it", but what about the above statement?

Just curious here.

Things would be so much simpler if these companies used Steam for all their games.

Looks like I'll just not buy their games. Don't pirate out of principal and also don't support these kind of attempts at draconian control.

A little off topic here but I'm curious, someone stated the whole agreement thing when installing the game.

What if i buy the game for PC, unaware of this DRM security, the online activation etc, and i do not agree with it. Am i entitled to my money back, can i physically go back to the shop and tell the shop to give me my money back because i do not agree with what the developers are offering me here.

I know, in this country at least, you are not able to get a refund on a PC game if it will not run on your computer. Everytime i buy a game i am reminded by the shop attendant "Are you sure your computer can handle this, because you cannot refund it", but what about the above statement?

Just curious here.

lucfonzy

If it's on the back of the box you can't complain. It can be an ambiguous statement, something along the lines of "Internet connection required to play the game - for more info check www.technoviking.com", but in that case it's also useless to complain.

Take game that, from what I've seen, most were 'meh' about and then do this. Oh well, SC:Conviction and Ghost Recon: Future Warrior aren't really that big a deal anyway.

Don't worry folks, Starcraft 2 is around the corner. Forget about this game and move on. Online save games is ridiculous though.

I think they should make it a level playing field. Lock the game to that specific Xbox 360 and PS3. Friend of mine said to me yesterday, "so what that's what you should expect being a PC gamer". He only plays on 360, and I would encourage devs to create a locking system to the consoles as well. It would stop a lot of selling of console second hand games, and in fact help the industry. I say this because I can't see why I'm being punished for buying games on PC.
So if you get annew console, you have to jump through hoops to get deactivation to start playing the game on your new console.

Now I've argued in favor of DRM to delay the hackers from cracking a game long enough for the devs and publisher to get the sales they deserve for their work, at least in the first month of release when most of the lifetime sales generally happen.

Rawtheory333

Pirates have games cracked days before release. DRM does nothing. I've heard of people beating ME 2 the day before release.

A little off topic here but I'm curious, someone stated the whole agreement thing when installing the game.

What if i buy the game for PC, unaware of this DRM security, the online activation etc, and i do not agree with it. Am i entitled to my money back, can i physically go back to the shop and tell the shop to give me my money back because i do not agree with what the developers are offering me here.

I know, in this country at least, you are not able to get a refund on a PC game if it will not run on your computer. Everytime i buy a game i am reminded by the shop attendant "Are you sure your computer can handle this, because you cannot refund it", but what about the above statement?

Just curious here.

lucfonzy

more mistreatment of PC gamers, but the old saying "buyer beware" is the golden rule concerning purchases.

This is why I wish every game had a demo, so you could get a good idea of just how the game feels in addition to whatever technical issues your computer has with the game.

[QUOTE="lucfonzy"]

A little off topic here but I'm curious, someone stated the whole agreement thing when installing the game.

What if i buy the game for PC, unaware of this DRM security, the online activation etc, and i do not agree with it. Am i entitled to my money back, can i physically go back to the shop and tell the shop to give me my money back because i do not agree with what the developers are offering me here.

I know, in this country at least, you are not able to get a refund on a PC game if it will not run on your computer. Everytime i buy a game i am reminded by the shop attendant "Are you sure your computer can handle this, because you cannot refund it", but what about the above statement?

Just curious here.

Baranga

If it's on the back of the box you can't complain. It can be an ambiguous statement, something along the lines of "Internet connection required to play the game - for more info check www.technoviking.com", but in that case it's also useless to complain.

did...did someone say TECHNO VIKING!

sorry, this thread is depressing me...thought it could use a small beam of sunshine

[QUOTE="lucfonzy"]

A little off topic here but I'm curious, someone stated the whole agreement thing when installing the game.

What if i buy the game for PC, unaware of this DRM security, the online activation etc, and i do not agree with it. Am i entitled to my money back, can i physically go back to the shop and tell the shop to give me my money back because i do not agree with what the developers are offering me here.

I know, in this country at least, you are not able to get a refund on a PC game if it will not run on your computer. Everytime i buy a game i am reminded by the shop attendant "Are you sure your computer can handle this, because you cannot refund it", but what about the above statement?

Just curious here.

mrbojangles25

more mistreatment of PC gamers, but the old saying "buyer beware" is the golden rule concerning purchases.

This is why I wish every game had a demo, so you could get a good idea of just how the game feels in addition to whatever technical issues your computer has with the game.

Remember the old days where near every game had a demo prior to release. Before Broadband became less expensive, you picked up magazines with the latest demos to try.

Things would be so much simpler if these companies used Steam for all their games.

King9999

Steam still requires an internet connection at installation. So, if your internet is down when you bring the game home from the store, you won't be able to install it. It also leaves open the possibility that Steam may shut down one day, and Valve will not keep their promise of releasing patches to allow offline installation. Ubisoft's system is really quite similar to Steam. You are still depending on an online service. It may be acceptable to a lot of gamers, but not me.

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

[QUOTE="lucfonzy"]

A little off topic here but I'm curious, someone stated the whole agreement thing when installing the game.

What if i buy the game for PC, unaware of this DRM security, the online activation etc, and i do not agree with it. Am i entitled to my money back, can i physically go back to the shop and tell the shop to give me my money back because i do not agree with what the developers are offering me here.

I know, in this country at least, you are not able to get a refund on a PC game if it will not run on your computer. Everytime i buy a game i am reminded by the shop attendant "Are you sure your computer can handle this, because you cannot refund it", but what about the above statement?

Just curious here.

DigiTM73

more mistreatment of PC gamers, but the old saying "buyer beware" is the golden rule concerning purchases.

This is why I wish every game had a demo, so you could get a good idea of just how the game feels in addition to whatever technical issues your computer has with the game.

Remember the old days where near every game had a demo prior to release. Before Broadband became less expensive, you picked up magazines with the latest demos to try.

yup

I was an avid PC Gamer subscriber when I was in middle school...I still have all my demo discs at my folk's place lol. Sometimes I leaf through them just for the sake of nostalgia

"Oooooh MDK...that was a good one" I will reminisce

"Oooooh Warhammer: Dark Omen...my how that franchise has grown" I will recal fondly.

:P

Now I've argued in favor of DRM to delay the hackers from cracking a game long enough for the devs and publisher to get the sales they deserve for their work, at least in the first month of release when most of the lifetime sales generally happen.

But this move by Ubisoft is the just a bad business decision. Its laid out in this article.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/02/17/you-maniacs/#more-25624

This might stave off cracks for AC2 indefinitely but at what price. If this is implemented in all Ubisoft games on PC from here on out as they themselves have indicated, then they're sales on PC will plummet as word gets out on the DRM's draconian copyright protection measures and they might absolve to go console only...

Rawtheory333

Sometimes I wonder if the devs sat around the big meeting table all day with a big white board stating "HOW TO SCREW UP OUR PC SALES?" in big bold letter as the meeting agenda.

They really are trying their darndest to promote piracy, it seems to appear.

I think they should make it a level playing field. Lock the game to that specific Xbox 360 and PS3. Friend of mine said to me yesterday, "so what that's what you should expect being a PC gamer". He only plays on 360, and I would encourage devs to create a locking system to the consoles as well. It would stop a lot of selling of console second hand games, and in fact help the industry. I say this because I can't see why I'm being punished for buying games on PC.
So if you get annew console, you have to jump through hoops to get deactivation to start playing the game on your new console.

DigiTM73

While i do hate the idea of what you are suggesting along with what is happening with AC2. Sony are trying something similar with the new SOCOM game on PSP. You need to register your copy of the game online if you want to play multiplayer and once you do its then tied to whatever account its made with. Meaning if you buy it used you need to fork out $20 to get the online for that working again.

Actually that brings up another question. Can people in the US trade in pc games? I know in the UK shops will no longer take pc games in.

[QUOTE="DigiTM73"]

I think they should make it a level playing field. Lock the game to that specific Xbox 360 and PS3. Friend of mine said to me yesterday, "so what that's what you should expect being a PC gamer". He only plays on 360, and I would encourage devs to create a locking system to the consoles as well. It would stop a lot of selling of console second hand games, and in fact help the industry. I say this because I can't see why I'm being punished for buying games on PC.
So if you get annew console, you have to jump through hoops to get deactivation to start playing the game on your new console.

Ocid1

While i do hate the idea of what you are suggesting along with what is happening with AC2. Sony are trying something similar with the new SOCOM game on PSP. You need to register your copy of the game online if you want to play multiplayer and once you do its then tied to whatever account its made with. Meaning if you buy it used you need to fork out $20 to get the online for that working again.

Actually that brings up another question. Can people in the US trade in pc games? I know in the UK shops will no longer take pc games in.

My suggestion is bad, all I meant was make it a level field. Stop picking on PC and blame piracy. Alien Vs Predator, if you do a search on the net, there's not just PC version cracked, but also 360 version. But pirating a 360 game is perfectly legal and ok. This is what these companies are pretty much saying. Iknow the big difference is you have to get your console modded to run copied games but I know companies that can sell that service cheap.
Also in Australia they stopped the tradein of PC games long ago. IN fact EB used to have if you don't like it within 7 days return with no questions asked. This has stopped for PC games now.

After all these years and Ubisoft is still scratcing their heads, wondering how they're not profiting much from the PC platform. It's that **** simple.

You throw in a bunch of free DLC's after a month or two to keep the game alive, making the game worth buying ( that's how Valve does it and that's how they're so awesome ) but noooooooo, they bring up a DRM that requires you to be online while playing the game ALL THE TIME.

Like how the hell are people going to play the game at all if they get internet disconnections or if it's a rainy day with lightning?

[QUOTE="Ocid1"]

[QUOTE="DigiTM73"]

I think they should make it a level playing field. Lock the game to that specific Xbox 360 and PS3. Friend of mine said to me yesterday, "so what that's what you should expect being a PC gamer". He only plays on 360, and I would encourage devs to create a locking system to the consoles as well. It would stop a lot of selling of console second hand games, and in fact help the industry. I say this because I can't see why I'm being punished for buying games on PC.
So if you get annew console, you have to jump through hoops to get deactivation to start playing the game on your new console.

DigiTM73

While i do hate the idea of what you are suggesting along with what is happening with AC2. Sony are trying something similar with the new SOCOM game on PSP. You need to register your copy of the game online if you want to play multiplayer and once you do its then tied to whatever account its made with. Meaning if you buy it used you need to fork out $20 to get the online for that working again.

Actually that brings up another question. Can people in the US trade in pc games? I know in the UK shops will no longer take pc games in.

My suggestion is bad, all I meant was make it a level field. Stop picking on PC and blame piracy. Alien Vs Predator, if you do a search on the net, there's not just PC version cracked, but also 360 version. But pirating a 360 game is perfectly legal and ok. This is what these companies are pretty much saying. Iknow the big difference is you have to get your console modded to run copied games but I know companies that can sell that service cheap.
Also in Australia they stopped the tradein of PC games long ago. IN fact EB used to have if you don't like it within 7 days return with no questions asked. This has stopped for PC games now.

Yeah i understand what you mean about creating a level playing field. I play on both pc and console but i find it odd how pc gets such a bad rap for everything when it comes to it. There was barely any hubub about MS banning a million consoles last year and while it does get its mention with publishers trying to find ways to combat it with free dlc 2nd hand console games don't nearly get the bad rap piracy gets on the pc.

When that is genuinely a lost sale.

I am a long time PC gamer and game developer. I have more than 250+ PC games listed in Gamespot as my collection. Ubi needs to explain to me why i should always be online if i am playing a single player game? Ubi's epic FAIL. Too bad I already order the game before they announce all these non-sense such as delaying PC version, DX9 for PC, and now DRM that would boot me back to the last check point if my internet fail. This is hurting those with poor quality internet connection and people like me who pay for the game.I should not be punished for paying the game while pirates can play it without the internet. I am not sure if this will "encourage" people to buy the game because I felt the opposite. Well, I will not buy any PC game from Ubi anymore unless they fix this mess.

I will not purchase this game. I won't pirate it either. Not that I was really interested in playng the game anyway. DRM only hurts paying customers. I refuse to be punished because I'm an honest customer.

I actually wonder : how long it will take for some "pirate brand" to crack this game . I mean , this will be like chalenge . I really thing there will be crack - sooner or latter . And peaple who bought the game will be %#$^ hard.

I thought about buying it , but not anymore (my connection is really bad and usually goes of at any time it wants).

Scan the AC2 internet traffic and save somewhere the sent data and the received data, make a local-hosted server that reroutes the sent bits to itself and send authentication data back.

It's not even remotely complex, anyone with a bit of knowledge about networking and coding should be able to make this almost flawlessly.

And the worst part is that they will probably put all the blame for low sales on pirates and act like they are the knights in shining armor that came to the world to provide goodness for all the gaming world needs, then spout some random "ZOMG LOW SALES = PC GAMING IS DYING" and downgrade even further their support to the platform.

*sigh*

We had EA with install limits, then Ubi with forced internet access, I wonder what's next.