Latest Ubisoft DRM measure - all SP saves stored on a cloud server - by EvaUnit02
Ostriig on 22/2/2010 at 14:19
Actually, that looks like the most sensible idea for a gamers' protest I've seen in ages. You may want to consider putting some big red text or something explaining what your link is actually about.
Still, I've got two questions about this:
- Why is it important to pick a retailer that does not specify the DRM? If Tesco gets word of this and ninja-edits the internet requirement into the product specification, could that be grounds for them to reject your refund later on? I was under the impression that you could return it for any reason withing a certain period, as long as it was still sealed.
- What's up with this: "The retailer will have a mountain of games that are of much lower value to them than they were at release" - a couple of weeks gone by would incur a price drop? And one that's beyond the cost cutting of the preorder? Or is the retailer somehow obligated to sell a returned product for less?
gunsmoke on 22/2/2010 at 15:30
Quote Posted by Ostriig
Actually, that looks like the most sensible idea for a gamers' protest I've seen in ages. You may want to consider putting some big red text or something explaining what your link is actually about.
Still, I've got two questions about this:
- Why is it important to pick a retailer that does not specify the DRM? If Tesco gets word of this and ninja-edits the internet requirement into the product specification, could that be grounds for them to reject your refund later on? I was under the impression that you could return it for any reason withing a certain period, as long as it was still sealed.
They picked Tesco for one reason: they don't specify in their ad the 'permanent internet connection required to play this game" fact. That gives Savygamer cause (in their minds) reasonable cause to return it for full price.
Quote:
- What's up with this: "The retailer will have a mountain of games that are of much lower value to them than they were at release" - a couple of weeks gone by would incur a price drop? And one that's beyond the cost cutting of the preorder? Or is the retailer somehow obligated to sell a returned product for less?
I have no idea why they would be worth less. Unless it is opened or damaged, retailers can re-sell it as new stock. The ONLY thing I can think of?: that games lose their value faster than every other form of media in the world. Games (especially ones that aren't AAA titles) get price-reductions in as short as a couple weeks. My guess is that is why they want people to wait until the 13th of April. Between the time elapsed and the time to RMA and actually get the parcel back to Tesco, it might already be a discounted title.
Ostriig on 22/2/2010 at 16:20
Quote Posted by gunsmoke
They picked Tesco for one reason: they don't specify in their ad the 'permanent internet connection required to play this game" fact. That gives Savygamer cause (in their minds) reasonable cause to return it for full price.
If the lack of said specification is an absolute requirement for this scheme to work, and without it they would be denied the refund, it's very easy for Tesco to kill it off in the cradle. Or Ubisoft could as well, by alerting their retailers to update their product descriptions. They could move quick, in the next couple of days, and even if they still had to reimburse the number of purchasers from prior to the description update, I doubt that would be all that massive since last Friday.
What had me confused was that I was under the impression you needn't specify a reason, and could just go for the bog standard "a girl has the right to change her mind" legal excuse under the UK (
http://www.berr.gov.uk/whatwedo/consumers/fact-sheets/page38102.html#Q3IunderstandIcanchangemymindifIdonotwantthegoodsorservicesDoesthatapplyinallcases) Distance Selling act or somesuch. But it appears the period for that is just 7 days, not a month, so it probably wouldn't fit the bill for what they're trying to pull.
Quote:
I have no idea why they would be worth less. Unless it is opened or damaged, retailers can re-sell it as new stock. The ONLY thing I can think of?: that games lose their value faster than every other form of media in the world. Games (especially ones that aren't AAA titles) get price-reductions in as short as a couple weeks. My guess is that is why they want people to wait until the 13th of April. Between the time elapsed and the time to RMA and actually get the parcel back to Tesco, it might already be a discounted title.
I guess I'm just a bit surprised that games would fall so much in price in under a month. We're talking about them going from release day price to down below preorder price for the seller to incur a notable loss (aside from postage). Maybe I just haven't been paying enough attention.
Nameless Voice on 22/2/2010 at 16:41
I approve of this. People should do this every time a game that they are interested is released with crippling DRM.
(I'll admit that AC2 is not a game that I am currently interested in, so I'll be giving this a miss.)
Jason Moyer on 22/2/2010 at 16:55
Quote Posted by EvaUnit02
Good god, you're always whining about disc checks. Just use no disc cracks already, I do so with my retail copies of Dragon Age and Mass Effect 2 and everything's been hunky dory.
If you can find a working one for Bioshock 2 let me know. I've had no problems with the GFWL protection or with patching the game from inside or outside the GFWL client, but you'd think after a week there would be a crack for the 1.0.0.1 version.
People act like disk checks aren't a big deal, but there are always games that go months if not years without one. People stopped playing GT Legends 2-3 years ago and it was only recently that the patched version was cracked. The final version of Psychonauts took forever for a nocd patch. In addition to that, I've had more than one nocd attempt to call home when I ran it (thank you firewall), and considering how scummy and adware-infested most pirate sites are that sort of thing isn't a big surprise.
I really like that I was able to install Mirror's Edge, patch it, run it, and that was it. No disk check, no needless e-commerce app running in the background, no need to wait 6 months for a crack, just an icon that when clicked launches the game with no fuss. I still don't understand why people who legitimately purchase software were so repulsed by SecureROM authentication, when it was the most hassle-free copy protection ever. The "omg wut if ur drive or PC explodes" thing is BS, because in those cases you'd already be calling Microsoft to re-authenticate your copy of Windows, which doesn't seem to be a big deal to most people.
Ostriig on 22/2/2010 at 17:24
What you want is not a cracked launcher, but a disc mini-image to mount with a virtual drive, and to the application it looks like the original disc. That way you don't have to overwrite an .exe and it theoretically works with any patch version of a game.
I think I've found one for BS2, I'll send you a PM.
As for the SecuROM topic, as long as it's an unlimited, once-per-install authentication and I have reasonable confidence that the publisher issues a no-authentication patch before taking the server down after several years, it's the loveliest.
bikerdude on 22/2/2010 at 20:29
I for one wont be buying any of their games that have been shipped with this short sighted bollox, so either they pull it or the pirates win, which is an oxymoron...
:eww:
Jason Moyer on 22/2/2010 at 21:10
Quote Posted by Ostriig
What you want is not a cracked launcher, but a disc mini-image to mount with a virtual drive, and to the application it looks like the original disc. That way you don't have to overwrite an .exe and it theoretically works with any patch version of a game.
Thanks, I was aware of the mini-image, I just don't use virtual drives (I guess I could if it doesn't cause a conflict with any of my other games). I should probably buy GameJackal or something, but it's just easier to either not have a disk check or to backup the original exe in case of future patches and paste a cracked one. It's also incredibly silly that I have to break the law in order to play a legally-purchased game that installed 9 gigs to my hard drive, especially when I could just save the $40-60 and pirate the thing with basically the same effort that it takes to bypass their draconian copy protection.
EvaUnit02 on 22/2/2010 at 22:52
So disc checks are draconian now? LOL. The Ubisoft solution certainly is though.
Jason Moyer on 22/2/2010 at 23:49
Well yeah, the Ubi thing is the worst copy protection ever. I wonder if the piracy/sales on their last several PC titles were really bad or what, as it seems odd going from not using anything to something this ridiculous. It's really irritating given how many titles I've (surprisingly) purchased from them over the years and how many new titles I had been looking forward to this year, particularly AC2/PoP/SC.
I really wish if, PC publishers are going to require copy protection, they'd just give us an either/or option when installing of using an .exe that has a disk check or one that does an online activation. It seems like everyone would be happy and with both solutions being provided by the same company I can't see how it would be that difficult to implement. This piling on of DRM that Bioshock started, GTA4 mastered, and AC2 is taking to the next level is just stupid and more harmful to PC gaming than piracy is, imho.
