... even if it is only to a degree. It's ridiculous DRM scheme of requiring a constant internet connection for it's games seems to be on the way out. Both Assassins Creed II and Splinter Cell Conviction have had the constant authentication requirement toned down; you still need a connection when starting the game so the DRM is still a hinderance, however it's a step in the right direction.As I've said in the past, a one time 'activation' is perfectly acceptable to me. Requiring an internet connection be maintained for single player, however, is still unacceptable. At least when Ubisoft's server farts, players won't lose all of their progress.
Yes but still bad. Won't be playing Ubisoft games. Just my stand. Yours might be different.
Ubi DRM is like Steam but without Off Line mode. Why don't they add one? Well, still 1 step in the right direction I suppose. (where 1 better than 0)
After the disaster that was settlers 7, I won't be buying any more ubisoft-published games.
Yeah, one check per startup sounds fine - until that check fails for a week straight.
I'd view that sort of DRM as acceptable for a primarily MP game (cause you gonna be online and authenticated to play anyways) but not offline.
One online activation is all it should take. I also don't mind Stardock's need to validate on updating, since I'm already online downloading the patch anyway. Although, there are many posts on here where Stardock's updates are failing, which if happened to me would royally suck.
There is no sense in needing to prove the game's validity every single time you load it. And there definitely isn't a need to prove it every second.
Until Ubisoft realizes this, they won't sell a computer game to me.
Their line doesn't look very interesting. I'd pass even without the intrusive DRM.
whats this with ubisoft problems never heard of it course i play games like heroes v tribes of the east and assasins creed 1,2, and brotherhood on the 360 so they dont need that
Don't read too much into that article. Ubisoft says that new titles may still use the DRM, even though they have removed it from the games that are already using it.
Cool cause I'd love to play the games I've paid for without acquiring them through other means after purchase just to get a working copy
Online check every time I start a game. No thanks!
At this point, I doubt it has anything to do with adopting a more relaxed approach and everything to do with cutting unnecessary server overhead.
Fact is, I won't be buying any Ubisoft games while they retain these outright stupid policies.
Still no buy. It's like: "well, gee thanks Mr. Murder. Thank you for only stabbing me once rather than twice. So kind."
Well when you are hanging off a cliff in the other direction, I am not sure a step in the right direction is really worth celebrating. We need a few leaps and bounds from this company.
I doubt they would change anything for thier customers sake. Thier servers probably cost too much and reasearch showed that it didn't help in the slightest or something.
They just need a friendly publisher who is just like them to come along and show them they arn't the only dirty, kinky publisher in the world. That works for humans at least...
Lol again ! Those games are only to old in there idea of how much is a game old. (in the financial way of course) so they only do this to get server ressources back in order to get them to the new games that will still use the DRM in the first form.
Anyway... Ubisort like 99% of the publisher and develloppers in the gaming industry nowdays are only crap makers... Why even bother about what they do ? Where are the golden ages of pc gaming ?...
Where are the golden ages of pc gaming ?
It's not PC that's in a slump, the entire industry has been pretty cold for the last few years. I can't remember the last time I was excited about a big name game on release day. Everything is so bland and generic these days that things like the X-Men arcade game re-release is hailed as an amazing game.
Back on topic, nothing much more to say here. Ubisoft can get out of the PC game business for all I care. Their vision of the future of PC gaming is cancer, and EA seems to desperately want to implement the same system. They already have on some; I believe C&C4 required an active connection to play single player.
As others said, I don't mind one time activation and I don't mind the system checking on me to DL patches. Requiring an active connection beyond that for a single player game is garbage, and I won't be giving money to any company that goes that direction.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
