I think the point is supposed to be that naming them is what they want, and encourages them.
But hey, when Ubisoft's servers are inevitably shut down, I'll be glad these people were here to undo the stupidity Ubisoft has forced down our throats. So I don't really see the issue with it.
On a related note, my internet connection has been down for the last few hours. (typing this on my iPhone)
Since I can't really do anything on the net I think I'll go play some games.
Good thing I hadn't bought final fight or assasins creed 2 pc.
I pretty much feel the same way about R.U.S.E. RTS's are one of my main go-to games when my internet's acting shoddy or has gone down. At the moment there have been plenty of other strategy games released this year that do the job. That and the game's been delayed until about september.
So basically aside from the DRM, lacking in hype and coming at the tail end of a bunch of RTS's released this year, it looks like R.U.S.E. is likely setting itself up to be released in the same time period as Starcraft 2. Something that C&C4, Chaos Rising and SupCom2 all likely took pains to avoid.
Still at least should the game fail to do as well as expected, we know what the cause is.
On a related note, my internet connection has been down for the last few hours. (typing this on my iPhone)
Since I can't really do anything on the net I think I'll go play some games.
Good thing I hadn't bought final fight or assasins creed 2 pc.
I pretty much feel the same way about R.U.S.E. RTS's are one of my main go-to games when my internet's acting shoddy or has gone down. At the moment there have been plenty of other strategy games released this year that do the job. That and the game's been delayed until about september.
So basically aside from the DRM, lacking in hype and coming at the tail end of a bunch of RTS's released this year, it looks like R.U.S.E. is likely setting itself up to be released in the same time period as Starcraft 2. Something that C&C4, Chaos Rising and SupCom2 all likely took pains to avoid.
Still at least should the game fail to do as well as expected, we know what the cause is.
Er, pirates?
It's pirate right?
I'm jonesing here man, just phoned up my ISP and "they are aware of the issue and are working on resolving it".
I've got the shakes, using my iPhone just isn't enough.. I could setup tethering between my iPhone and laptop, then I could have a proper net experience, no online gaming though.
Funny thing is my Internet connection is a more expensive than normal business line, which is meant to be more reliable than a residential line. Damn it, I don't feel like going out and i'm in the middle of washday.
GrimReaper on
PSN | Steam
---
I've got a spare copy of Portal, if anyone wants it message me.
On a related note, my internet connection has been down for the last few hours. (typing this on my iPhone)
Since I can't really do anything on the net I think I'll go play some games.
Good thing I hadn't bought final fight or assasins creed 2 pc.
NO MAN UR WORNG
Because... erm, hum... companies sometimes take risks... aaaah... piracy is bad.... and 90% of pirates will always buy protected games...
It lives! My net connection is now back up, literally just now. So, it's been down since first thing this morning when I tried accessing my email. (so about 8 hours probably longer that my net connection was down)
I am officially scared for the future if all games required an always on internet connection.
GrimReaper on
PSN | Steam
---
I've got a spare copy of Portal, if anyone wants it message me.
0
Options
FiggyFighter of the night manChampion of the sunRegistered Userregular
edited April 2010
It's pretty obvious your Internet connection was taken down for 8 hours because you were pirating video games.
The Escapist had a good article about Ubisoft's DRM (link) that pointed out what companies do not want to hear: When a game is not cracked for 6 weeks, and people are still not buying it, you can not blame piracy.
The Escapist had a good article about Ubisoft's DRM (link) that pointed out what companies do not want to hear: When a game is not cracked for 6 weeks, and people are still not buying it, you can not blame piracy.
I'm not sure he's saying that ubisoft can't blame piracy, just that for the ginormous effeort they'd eventually need to put into play, they wouldn't really see much if any rise in sales.
But his point stands, which is why I think sales statistics for AC2 on the PC are extremely relevant now. The game sold multiple millions on the consoles, and the presumption is that it did not suffer piracy on the PC during its most crucial sales period (which I would argue was actually several months BEFORE the PC release when the console version came out, but we'll leave that for now). It may only be one point of data, just an anecdote, but it at least gives some sort of reference point.
I do however also take issue with his using VGChartz, because frankly, that site is absolutely rubbish and statistics often have no actual basis in any statements, or otherwise actual reality (I mean come on, doing a search the PC version of AC2 doesn't even have a listing of any sales. Another search reveals that the Orange Box only sold 1.3 million units total, and bizarrely, none of those were on the PC).
The Escapist had a good article about Ubisoft's DRM (link) that pointed out what companies do not want to hear: When a game is not cracked for 6 weeks, and people are still not buying it, you can not blame piracy.
I'm not sure he's saying that ubisoft can't blame piracy, just that for the ginormous effeort they'd eventually need to put into play, they wouldn't really see much if any rise in sales.
But his point stands, which is why I think sales statistics for AC2 on the PC are extremely relevant now. The game sold multiple millions on the consoles, and the presumption is that it did not suffer piracy on the PC during its most crucial sales period (which I would argue was actually several months BEFORE the PC release when the console version came out, but we'll leave that for now). It may only be one point of data, just an anecdote, but it at least gives some sort of reference point.
I do however also take issue with his using VGChartz, because frankly, that site is absolutely rubbish and statistics often have no actual basis in any statements, or otherwise actual reality (I mean come on, doing a search the PC version of AC2 doesn't even have a listing of any sales. Another search reveals that the Orange Box only sold 1.3 million units total, and bizarrely, none of those were on the PC).
Kudos to pointing those out. (Note: not sarcastic, I like to be double checked).
The reason people don't like VGChartz is because they will literally make up information based on no industry research whatsoever. They've said this. They also say they will revise it with new data when it becomes available, but every month bales of bad data survives, becomes archived, and becomes "trusted."
They get some crap right, but it's impossible to tell what.
The Escapist had a good article about Ubisoft's DRM (link) that pointed out what companies do not want to hear: When a game is not cracked for 6 weeks, and people are still not buying it, you can not blame piracy.
I'm not sure he's saying that ubisoft can't blame piracy, just that for the ginormous effeort they'd eventually need to put into play, they wouldn't really see much if any rise in sales.
But his point stands, which is why I think sales statistics for AC2 on the PC are extremely relevant now. The game sold multiple millions on the consoles, and the presumption is that it did not suffer piracy on the PC during its most crucial sales period (which I would argue was actually several months BEFORE the PC release when the console version came out, but we'll leave that for now). It may only be one point of data, just an anecdote, but it at least gives some sort of reference point.
I do however also take issue with his using VGChartz, because frankly, that site is absolutely rubbish and statistics often have no actual basis in any statements, or otherwise actual reality (I mean come on, doing a search the PC version of AC2 doesn't even have a listing of any sales. Another search reveals that the Orange Box only sold 1.3 million units total, and bizarrely, none of those were on the PC).
How can Ubisoft blame piracy? They say their DRM wasn't cracked for 6 weeks. Therefore the game couldn't be pirated during those six weeks. So those 6 weeks of sales should have no impact from piracy. We have heard such outrageous figures about lost sales from piracy. Now we know, that at least when concerning ACII, these figures are lies.
Cronus on
"Read twice, post once. It's almost like 'measure twice, cut once' only with reading." - MetaverseNomad
And when they're done, they'll have a crack for an old game that nobody cares about anymore.
I think one factor that that Escapist article might not be taken into account is the fact that the PC version of Assassin's Creed II came out several months after the console versions, so comparing its sales to other big releases really isn't fair. Platform exclusivity blurs things somewhat, but I don't think it's too outrageous to incorporate the way in which most sales of a game occur during the first few months into this situation.
In other words, the game was old hat before it even came out, so sales expectations should've always been pretty low.
Not that I don't agree with the general gist of the article, but there's still plenty of room for Ubisoft to claim that the DRM helped sales.
The Escapist had a good article about Ubisoft's DRM (link) that pointed out what companies do not want to hear: When a game is not cracked for 6 weeks, and people are still not buying it, you can not blame piracy.
I'm not sure he's saying that ubisoft can't blame piracy, just that for the ginormous effeort they'd eventually need to put into play, they wouldn't really see much if any rise in sales.
But his point stands, which is why I think sales statistics for AC2 on the PC are extremely relevant now. The game sold multiple millions on the consoles, and the presumption is that it did not suffer piracy on the PC during its most crucial sales period (which I would argue was actually several months BEFORE the PC release when the console version came out, but we'll leave that for now). It may only be one point of data, just an anecdote, but it at least gives some sort of reference point.
I do however also take issue with his using VGChartz, because frankly, that site is absolutely rubbish and statistics often have no actual basis in any statements, or otherwise actual reality (I mean come on, doing a search the PC version of AC2 doesn't even have a listing of any sales. Another search reveals that the Orange Box only sold 1.3 million units total, and bizarrely, none of those were on the PC).
How can Ubisoft blame piracy? They say their DRM wasn't cracked for 6 weeks. Therefore the game couldn't be pirated during those six weeks. So those 6 weeks of sales should have no impact from piracy. We have heard such outrageous figures about lost sales from piracy. Now we know, that at least when concerning ACII, these figures are lies.
"The PC market is so rife with piracy that nobody would EVER consider paying for a product, they simply pirate other games instead. This is the only reasonable explanation for why Assassin's Creed 2 failed to sell on the PC platform where sales on the PS3 and 360 were unhindered."
Done, and done.
EDIT: Not that I believe they'll actually try for that crazy approach, but I know enough that it's a real possibility they'll say something along those lines.
subedii on
0
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
The Escapist had a good article about Ubisoft's DRM (link) that pointed out what companies do not want to hear: When a game is not cracked for 6 weeks, and people are still not buying it, you can not blame piracy.
I'm not sure he's saying that ubisoft can't blame piracy, just that for the ginormous effeort they'd eventually need to put into play, they wouldn't really see much if any rise in sales.
But his point stands, which is why I think sales statistics for AC2 on the PC are extremely relevant now. The game sold multiple millions on the consoles, and the presumption is that it did not suffer piracy on the PC during its most crucial sales period (which I would argue was actually several months BEFORE the PC release when the console version came out, but we'll leave that for now). It may only be one point of data, just an anecdote, but it at least gives some sort of reference point.
I do however also take issue with his using VGChartz, because frankly, that site is absolutely rubbish and statistics often have no actual basis in any statements, or otherwise actual reality (I mean come on, doing a search the PC version of AC2 doesn't even have a listing of any sales. Another search reveals that the Orange Box only sold 1.3 million units total, and bizarrely, none of those were on the PC).
How can Ubisoft blame piracy? They say their DRM wasn't cracked for 6 weeks. Therefore the game couldn't be pirated during those six weeks. So those 6 weeks of sales should have no impact from piracy. We have heard such outrageous figures about lost sales from piracy. Now we know, that at least when concerning ACII, these figures are lies.
A story was linked in the industry thread that Ubisoft is blaming Fox for Avatar: The Game not doing well.
So y'know. Ubisoft will blame everyone but themselves. We should accept that as their corporate statement.
No, I haven't lost nearly enough neurons to fall that horribly.
I mean, I won't waste my time arguing with someone who so blindly refuses to see the obvious consequences of such a fucking retarded move by Ubi.
Regardless of all your bold claims about business management, it's pretty clear you have no idea of what you're talking about... You accuse me of handwaving and promptly pulls crap out of your ass. At least I have 20 years of experience with pc gaming and all possible kinds of piracy, thanks to being a Brazilian gamer. You know, there was no other way to actually get the games back then. Thankfully i can do that now and I have bought most, if not all of the games I played along those 20 years, but at least I have the least bit knowledge about the whole issue, unlike you.
So yeah, keep lonely clapping your hands to the huge fiasco Ubi built for themselves, because, unfortunately for you, reality doesn't seem to agree with your wild baseless guesses.
I didn't make up a statistic. I put an estimate on a statistic that I'd be willing to wager money on. Which is the same things companies do. And that isn't exactly a "bold claim."
I think the issue here is that you're mistakenly interpreting my claim that DRM isn't necessarily a monetary loss every time for the companies that use it as defending Ubi's DRM.
RandomEngy on
Profile -> Signature Settings -> Hide signatures always. Then you don't have to read this worthless text anymore.
Settlers 7 hacked and slashed. Skidrow's crack apparently used parts of the original emulation software, which made it just a simplification of the emulation server, therefore making it a non-crack, just simplifying the matter so the dumbest idiot can use it.
Scene-related rants & stuff:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
As far as previous 'cracks' of Ubisoft's new DRM system are concerned:
Both of Skidr0w's releases show us they haven't had a look (probably
even didn't find) the actual protection code and everything hints on em
using parts of publicly collected 'challenge/response' pairs. Luckily
Assassin's Creed II is probably the only target ever where this approach
of 'emulating' the server by a static lookup will yield any measurable
success (due to a basic design flaw in an otherwise pretty neat
idea of software protection). In fact, we considered this approach as
generally too unreliable and 'unworthy' of a scene crack, so we didn't
care about doing it. Instead we opted for going for the arguably
most challenging implementation of Ubisoft's new DRM first
(emulating actual server-side game code). So here it is: The first
Ubisoft DRM crack!
@RELOADED:
Congrats on your recent advances in automating your Solidshield VM cracks.
We actually respect that. However, we wonder why you didn't go all the way
and recompiled the fixed decompiler output to optimized native x86 code as
we did as early as with Perry Rhodan (followed by Anno 1404).
Although we think there's not much merit to discussing technical details in
.nfos (mostly because it's impossible for anyone lacking the skills and
sources to fact-check these statements) we feel the need to preempt all
that made-up "they-ripped-it-from-some-unprotected-tuvaluan-multi12-binary"
bullshit that's sure to follow:
We invite anyone who is able to and interested enough in this to check the
history of scene-released Solidshield VM cracks taking into account things
like availability of possible alternate sources for the protected code
fragments at the time of release, similarity to compiled code (i.e. 'copy &
paste cracks' from differently protected or unprotected binaries), the
rebuilt code's resemblence of the original VM instructions regarding
sequence of mnemonics etc.pp. We're pretty confident (read '100% certain')
you'll come to the conclusion that we were first with respect to rebuilding
actual Solidshield VM code.
Nvm, 'mild respect'! ;)
P.S.
Finally, there's a chance of the good ol' times coming back (when
protections had to be dealt with on a per title basis by skilled
individuals) and an opportunity of telling the sharpies from the fakers
again. Thanks Ubi! (Yup, we're actually serious about this :))
The fact that the DRM has so many angles to be exploited is intriguing.
yeah, crack is out already. So is Settlers 7's. And two different groups have released copy-past cracks for the new system. It's completely and utterly beaten, and therefore all that the DRM does is make people unable to play the game or give up buying it at all.
Yeah they put out the next version of BD+ with the movie. AnyDVD has already been updated to crack everything but the South American and Australian versions. I love those guys.
RandomEngy on
Profile -> Signature Settings -> Hide signatures always. Then you don't have to read this worthless text anymore.
Windows Live has had a shitty online DRM thing for a while, just today I wasn't able to use my GTA IV save games because it wouldn't log into Live and so it just started a new game on an "offline" profile. Fucking bullshit.
Well excuse me for not checking the forums every hour of the day. I'm going to assume from your deflection that you've got nothing to respond with.
Actually, I have provided plenty of good points, but your head seems to be impervious to common sense or logic.
It as funny, though, reading you call my educated guesses that are based on first hand experience bullshit or handwaving, and then you promptly pull a bunch of ignorant made up crap off your ass and call them estimates.
You made it very clear don't know anything about the subjects (piracy and business) at hand, and you are even incapable of making up with rhetoric (which I think is bullshit but at least display some intelligence).
Windows Live has had a shitty online DRM thing for a while, just today I wasn't able to use my GTA IV save games because it wouldn't log into Live and so it just started a new game on an "offline" profile. Fucking bullshit.
That's not really DRM, more of an obfuscation. You just have to move your logged in profile save (found in folder like this one C:\Users\*user name*\AppData\Local\Rockstar Games\GTA IV\savegames\user_*) to the offline profile directory.
And really, the idea is to separate the save games of people running different profiles. Of course, they kind of ignored the part where Windows has been a multiuser environment for a considerable amount of time now, and re-implementing it is rather unnecessary.
That whole GFWL bullshit has killed my Batman completed save
fuck GFWL
why does it need to encrypt the saves and tie them to a specific installation of the user's profile, so that when I log in with the SAME user, on a new install, it declares my save is "corrupted".
it's so amazingly retarded and useless, and it's a SINGLE PLAYER save, who the fuck CARES I mess around with my saves???
Yes it is, BluRay was hyped up because you could upgrade the security on it unlike CSS. They don't need upgrades to change the way they display video, its to upgrade/change security.
Posts
But hey, when Ubisoft's servers are inevitably shut down, I'll be glad these people were here to undo the stupidity Ubisoft has forced down our throats. So I don't really see the issue with it.
If they see that they're just going to find a site that will give them the full story, and stay there. Great way to lose your readership.
Since I can't really do anything on the net I think I'll go play some games.
Good thing I hadn't bought final fight or assasins creed 2 pc.
---
I've got a spare copy of Portal, if anyone wants it message me.
I pretty much feel the same way about R.U.S.E. RTS's are one of my main go-to games when my internet's acting shoddy or has gone down. At the moment there have been plenty of other strategy games released this year that do the job. That and the game's been delayed until about september.
So basically aside from the DRM, lacking in hype and coming at the tail end of a bunch of RTS's released this year, it looks like R.U.S.E. is likely setting itself up to be released in the same time period as Starcraft 2. Something that C&C4, Chaos Rising and SupCom2 all likely took pains to avoid.
Still at least should the game fail to do as well as expected, we know what the cause is.
It's pirate right?
I'm jonesing here man, just phoned up my ISP and "they are aware of the issue and are working on resolving it".
I've got the shakes, using my iPhone just isn't enough.. I could setup tethering between my iPhone and laptop, then I could have a proper net experience, no online gaming though.
Funny thing is my Internet connection is a more expensive than normal business line, which is meant to be more reliable than a residential line. Damn it, I don't feel like going out and i'm in the middle of washday.
---
I've got a spare copy of Portal, if anyone wants it message me.
NO MAN UR WORNG
Because... erm, hum... companies sometimes take risks... aaaah... piracy is bad.... and 90% of pirates will always buy protected games...
I am officially scared for the future if all games required an always on internet connection.
---
I've got a spare copy of Portal, if anyone wants it message me.
Oh great, so if I check my email I get banned from the internet?
I prefer email over other means, it will be a cold day in hell I use facebook for communicating and twitter is only useful for small messages.
You can't win these days, next thing I know I'll get the door to my house blocked up for using ftp.
---
I've got a spare copy of Portal, if anyone wants it message me.
I'm not sure he's saying that ubisoft can't blame piracy, just that for the ginormous effeort they'd eventually need to put into play, they wouldn't really see much if any rise in sales.
But his point stands, which is why I think sales statistics for AC2 on the PC are extremely relevant now. The game sold multiple millions on the consoles, and the presumption is that it did not suffer piracy on the PC during its most crucial sales period (which I would argue was actually several months BEFORE the PC release when the console version came out, but we'll leave that for now). It may only be one point of data, just an anecdote, but it at least gives some sort of reference point.
I do however also take issue with his using VGChartz, because frankly, that site is absolutely rubbish and statistics often have no actual basis in any statements, or otherwise actual reality (I mean come on, doing a search the PC version of AC2 doesn't even have a listing of any sales. Another search reveals that the Orange Box only sold 1.3 million units total, and bizarrely, none of those were on the PC).
Kudos to pointing those out. (Note: not sarcastic, I like to be double checked).
They get some crap right, but it's impossible to tell what.
How can Ubisoft blame piracy? They say their DRM wasn't cracked for 6 weeks. Therefore the game couldn't be pirated during those six weeks. So those 6 weeks of sales should have no impact from piracy. We have heard such outrageous figures about lost sales from piracy. Now we know, that at least when concerning ACII, these figures are lies.
"Read twice, post once. It's almost like 'measure twice, cut once' only with reading." - MetaverseNomad
I think one factor that that Escapist article might not be taken into account is the fact that the PC version of Assassin's Creed II came out several months after the console versions, so comparing its sales to other big releases really isn't fair. Platform exclusivity blurs things somewhat, but I don't think it's too outrageous to incorporate the way in which most sales of a game occur during the first few months into this situation.
In other words, the game was old hat before it even came out, so sales expectations should've always been pretty low.
Not that I don't agree with the general gist of the article, but there's still plenty of room for Ubisoft to claim that the DRM helped sales.
"The PC market is so rife with piracy that nobody would EVER consider paying for a product, they simply pirate other games instead. This is the only reasonable explanation for why Assassin's Creed 2 failed to sell on the PC platform where sales on the PS3 and 360 were unhindered."
Done, and done.
EDIT: Not that I believe they'll actually try for that crazy approach, but I know enough that it's a real possibility they'll say something along those lines.
A story was linked in the industry thread that Ubisoft is blaming Fox for Avatar: The Game not doing well.
So y'know. Ubisoft will blame everyone but themselves. We should accept that as their corporate statement.
I didn't make up a statistic. I put an estimate on a statistic that I'd be willing to wager money on. Which is the same things companies do. And that isn't exactly a "bold claim."
I think the issue here is that you're mistakenly interpreting my claim that DRM isn't necessarily a monetary loss every time for the companies that use it as defending Ubi's DRM.
Nobody cares
The fact that the DRM has so many angles to be exploited is intriguing.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
I lol'd because it's true.
http://movies.yahoo.com/feature/movie-talk-avatar-blu-ray-consumers-cant-watch-DVD.html
Well excuse me for not checking the forums every hour of the day. I'm going to assume from your deflection that you've got nothing to respond with.
Yeah they put out the next version of BD+ with the movie. AnyDVD has already been updated to crack everything but the South American and Australian versions. I love those guys.
That's called making up a statistic.
If that were true I would be out of a job.
Saying others do it though does not make what you said any less a form of bullshit.
Actually, I have provided plenty of good points, but your head seems to be impervious to common sense or logic.
It as funny, though, reading you call my educated guesses that are based on first hand experience bullshit or handwaving, and then you promptly pull a bunch of ignorant made up crap off your ass and call them estimates.
You made it very clear don't know anything about the subjects (piracy and business) at hand, and you are even incapable of making up with rhetoric (which I think is bullshit but at least display some intelligence).
fuck GFWL
why does it need to encrypt the saves and tie them to a specific installation of the user's profile, so that when I log in with the SAME user, on a new install, it declares my save is "corrupted".
it's so amazingly retarded and useless, and it's a SINGLE PLAYER save, who the fuck CARES I mess around with my saves???
That's not exactly DRM though, is it?