You say it's a tragedy, but I say it's comedy because I get to laugh at all the idiots who defended uplay. I've met too many people IRL who lack the critical thinking skills and always responded with something like "I always have an internet connection, so it's not an issue for me".
Which is why one should never support corporations taking control over aspects that used to be neutral. It is possible to program for LAN and client-side hosting.
Too many people are caught up in trappings of marketing and convenience to ask themselves if they are dependent on a corporations good will for something. Be it installing games, playing games, updating games. Game saves, multiplayer, mods.
Because we're talking about games, it's pretty easy to just not consume. If you were talking about all the food companies doing something, there's not much we can do. Entertainment is a luxury and theoretically should be the easiest industry to boycott and force change.
On the other hand, you could also argue that because we're only talking about games, making a responsible consumer choice isn't that important.
There's no way to get everybody to boycott an entire industry on the principal of a change that has been made, at least not for any meaningful amount of time.
It's just kind of become an accepted fact of life that when you buy a game now days it will eventually be taken from you.
True, but if 10% of the playerbase joins you, their sales go down by 10%. That's a lot. Often, more than enough to notice. 10% can be completely doable, if it's something other people also care about.
And there's no reason to leave the DLC validation locked once the online servers go down. It's a simple courtesy to release one last patch to unlock the DRM on them and let people keep playing the shit they payed for.
Pretty sure this is what happened with multiple games when GFWL finally died. Dirt 3 and the Arkham Games are some I own which got upgraded to the GOTY version with DLC unlocked for all users, in the GFWL removal patch. Contrast with Ubisoft doing this, or Bulletstorm (where Gearbox basically patched out GFWL and re-released the game at 10x the usual Steam sale price). Sign of the scummiest of the scum publishers.
Same, I boycott EA since ME3 and I've not reneged on that since. Ubi I boycott after far cry 3 or 4, whichever takes place in India. Not gone back to them either.
I don't know how anyone expected this to go any other way. The only reason BS like uplay and origin exist at all is because these companies want control and this was the closest they could get on PC.
In case anyone doesn't realize, some of these games (like Assassin's Creed 2) don't even save your game game locally, it's only in a Ubisoft server.
I'm curious whether or not that server will stay up, and if any of the games which use the Ubisoft cloud save exclusively will even be playable any more.
Of course that's the risk with all online connected games- if a server goes down they either actively lock you out or just stop working. It's the reason I generally don't play single player games that require internet. AC 2 is a special case because I have nostalgia for it from when I was a kid playing the PS3 version.
And here's something useful I learned while investigating how to play AC2 offline; the PS3 version can be emulated with RPCS3, and the console versions actually make a local save, unlike the PC version. So if your copy gets nuked and won't save any more (might not happen, they might keep the cloud service available) emulation is an alternative. Get the game files for the GOTY and ignore modern Ubishit altogether.
I think the real tragedy here is people bought stuff from Ubisoft.
You say it's a tragedy, but I say it's comedy because I get to laugh at all the idiots who defended uplay. I've met too many people IRL who lack the critical thinking skills and always responded with something like "I always have an internet connection, so it's not an issue for me".
People defended uplay? that points system was stupid.
Which is why one should never support corporations taking control over aspects that used to be neutral. It is possible to program for LAN and client-side hosting.
Too many people are caught up in trappings of marketing and convenience to ask themselves if they are dependent on a corporations good will for something. Be it installing games, playing games, updating games. Game saves, multiplayer, mods.
When an entire industry makes a change in one direction all at once what option does the consumer have except to follow along?
Because we're talking about games, it's pretty easy to just not consume. If you were talking about all the food companies doing something, there's not much we can do. Entertainment is a luxury and theoretically should be the easiest industry to boycott and force change.
On the other hand, you could also argue that because we're only talking about games, making a responsible consumer choice isn't that important.
There's no way to get everybody to boycott an entire industry on the principal of a change that has been made, at least not for any meaningful amount of time.
It's just kind of become an accepted fact of life that when you buy a game now days it will eventually be taken from you.
True, but if 10% of the playerbase joins you, their sales go down by 10%. That's a lot. Often, more than enough to notice. 10% can be completely doable, if it's something other people also care about.
We are loathe to give up our circuses because most of us don’t actually want to spend our evenings and weekends building gallows.
I dunno, I wouldn't mind having a communal woodworking project.
If everyone jumped off a bridge, would you?
And there's no reason to leave the DLC validation locked once the online servers go down. It's a simple courtesy to release one last patch to unlock the DRM on them and let people keep playing the shit they payed for.
Pretty sure this is what happened with multiple games when GFWL finally died. Dirt 3 and the Arkham Games are some I own which got upgraded to the GOTY version with DLC unlocked for all users, in the GFWL removal patch. Contrast with Ubisoft doing this, or Bulletstorm (where Gearbox basically patched out GFWL and re-released the game at 10x the usual Steam sale price). Sign of the scummiest of the scum publishers.
> simple courtesy
> Expecting one shred of decency from Ubisoft
Completely vindicating me in my 15+ year boycott of Ubisoft.
Don't buy games from companies that use aggressive DRM, because this is what will eventually happen.
Same, I boycott EA since ME3 and I've not reneged on that since. Ubi I boycott after far cry 3 or 4, whichever takes place in India. Not gone back to them either.
I don't know how anyone expected this to go any other way. The only reason BS like uplay and origin exist at all is because these companies want control and this was the closest they could get on PC.
YARR HARR FIDDLE DEE DEE
The mistake was paying for an Ubisoft game.
Yar har fiddle dee dee! (Link is moderately NSFW; lots of innuendo)
God bless Fred Perry.
In case anyone doesn't realize, some of these games (like Assassin's Creed 2) don't even save your game game locally, it's only in a Ubisoft server.
I'm curious whether or not that server will stay up, and if any of the games which use the Ubisoft cloud save exclusively will even be playable any more.
Of course that's the risk with all online connected games- if a server goes down they either actively lock you out or just stop working. It's the reason I generally don't play single player games that require internet. AC 2 is a special case because I have nostalgia for it from when I was a kid playing the PS3 version.
And here's something useful I learned while investigating how to play AC2 offline; the PS3 version can be emulated with RPCS3, and the console versions actually make a local save, unlike the PC version. So if your copy gets nuked and won't save any more (might not happen, they might keep the cloud service available) emulation is an alternative. Get the game files for the GOTY and ignore modern Ubishit altogether.
I didn’t see the dupe post lol.