http://kotaku.com/5485179/rumor-ubisofts-new-drm-scheme-already-torpedoed-by-pirates

"Publisher Ubisoft's latest attempt to curb piracy of its PC games, making its debut appearance in submarine sim Silent Hunter 5, has allegedly been cracked by "sceners" the day after its release.

Ubi's new anti-piracy measure, which will also be employed in the upcoming PC version of Assassin's Creed II, requires that users maintain a constant internet connection in order to play their games. There is no "off-line" option, according to Ubisoft's official FAQ on the new DRM method, resulting in an experience that sounds less than pleasant. Ubisoft later attempted to clarify how its DRM implementation works.

In the case of Silent Hunter 5, which was released for Windows PCs yesterday, the team of crackers responsible claim that those who download the pirated version, currently making the rounds on torrent trackers and sites like Rapidshare, need only "Install game and copy crack, it's that simple!"

Their simple warning to those pirating the cracked version? "Don't install/use Ubisoft launcher, or simply block any connection to internet." Yep. Pretty much the opposite for those who own a legitimate copy of the game.

We've not attempted to download or install the supposed cracked version of Silent Hunter 5—nor do we intend to—so we can't verify the cracking groups claims. We have reached out to Ubisoft for comment."

----

But seriously, did anybody else expect much else? If these claims are indeed true, then mark this down as yet another case where the cracked version is superior than a legitimate version. 

Having a constant online connection to play a game is so lame, one of the reasons why I hate Steam. My school's connection blocks Steam, so that pretty much destroys my entire Steam collection. If Ubisoft really did go done the no off-line mode route then I don't feel sorry for them, at all. That's just begging hackers to tear up your game.

There were a few - ZenFoldorVGI and somebody with a Mii avatar among them - that suggested this wouldn't happen, or at least not this quickly.

loooool

TAGES protection (which they used before in quite a few games) was way more effective

It is possible to use Steam offline, though I'm unsure if you can always stay offline or if you do really need to go online to do certain things (or at least with non Valve games). However, I agree that it sucks when a school or university blocks games. While I was living in a campus dorm, the only other non-World of Warcraft games that would work online were Valve games (ie: Counter-Strike and TFC). Battlefield 2, Diablo 2 and a number of other games became worthless to me for a year.

And these companies measure how effective it is by how long it curbs piracy.

Sooo....yea...

And this is why insanely crazy DRM is useless... Like I've said before. Tech savvy pirates are going to crack your shit eventually. So if you must use DRM, use DRM that isn't a huge pain in the ass for legit customers. ie. disc checks. I don't like the current status quo with DRM schemes and I don't like the digital distribution direction we are heading in either (which is being used to take away your rights as a consumer. Can you really say you "bought" a game or that you "own" a game when you're not even allowed to sell it? What a joke). I know the Pro-DRM brigade justifies it by saying, "remember, when you buy a game, you're not really buying the game, but a license." But why can't you sell the bloody license then? What a joke. Who wants to be stuck with unwanted games that you aren't allowed to sell? (and even if you research games before, there's no way you'll know 100% if you'll like it or not. I liked the Puzzle Quest demo and the reviews were good so I bought it. But after playing the full version after awhile, it got so repetitive and boring that I didn't want to play it anymore. I'm stuck with a $10 game that I can't sell. Yippie. Sure I'm only out $10, fair enough. But imagine if it was a $50 game Steam game? Then that would totally suck. And that's where gaming is headed and it sucks) Software companies feel that they are so special that they deserve special "ownership" rules that don't apply to any other sector.

These companies are taking shit way too far. Software companies are the scum of the earth. I may like games but I can't say I like the companies themselves because most of them (and Ubisoft isn't the only one) have no trouble destroying consumer rights. Hopefully Ubisoft loses a lot of money from this PC port. Hopefully that'll open up their eyes. Apparently EA softened their DRM stance (back to disc checks) after the Spore debacle so hopefully this will be a repeat of the Spore effect.

Looks like Ubisoft has made a little change to Assassin's Creed 2's DRM. At least it'll restore you in the same spot where it kicks you if you lose your internet connection. Yay?

http://kotaku.com/5485359/ubisoft-making-emergency-changes-to-pc-drm

"With Ubisoft's new digital rights management regime for the PC proving both easy to circumvent and wildly unpopular, the publisher has been rushing to make changes to the system in an attempt to appease consumers.

Example: Assassin's Creed II isn't even out yet on PC, yet Ubisoft has already upgraded the game to v1.01, the main change awaiting purchasers of the game being the fact the game "can now be continued from the exact same point when connection is restored".

Previously, Ubisoft had said that should a player lose their internet connection - a requirement under the company's ridiculous new DRM scheme - their singleplayer, offline game would drop out, and upon reloading you'd be left at your last checkpoint, not the actual point where the game cut out on you.

It won't appease the furious masses, and nor should it, but at least it's an acknowledgement of how unpopular this whole thing has become."

they inhibit casual piracy. Take your average consumer. They go into the store and buy a game. They want their friend to have a copy of the game. With decent DRM  it prevents them from making a disc copy, or running without the DVD or installing. This successfully stopped piracy, and didn't hurt the consumer.

However, this upper level of DRM only stops serious hacker for a few weeks tops, and then everyone downloads the torrents or cracks. This also stops those who know about torrents and stuff, but don't bother with it. However, the kind of DRM that they impliment does hurt the general consumer who bought the software. However, sucessfully stopping piracy for a single week could bring in thousands of extra sales, as the same people who pirate games aren't always the patient type and want the game now (or 2 weeks early for that matter).

So, while I am against piracy, I am also against overly complicated DRM that can easily be cracked anyways. You'd think these large companies would hire some of the hackers to test out their DRM before bothering to even include it with their software.