By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - PC Discussion - Something I don't understand about Assassin's Creed 2 DRM complaints

This thread is silly. People are complaining because they're venting their anger at Ubisoft and the actual DRM itself. It's adding an extra and hefty barrier to purchasing a game that is in demand. Think of it this way, when the PS3 was released it was in high demand but the price point annoyed people as they couldn't afford it. People complained that something that was in demand was unreasonably priced. Sony suffered then; Ubisoft will now.

As for the DRM itself it's a single player game, and when you're immersed in a fantasy you don't want to suddenly be taken away from that immersion due to something that's out fo your control (think of the annoyance of a game crashing, now add the extra connection loss scenario). Many people will want to play on the go or on a system that may be offline for certain periods. Or, they could have a large family that share a connection. The number of potentially game stopping scenarios are endless. It also doesn't help that EA and Valve have implmented online services that actually work, where you don't need to be connected to the net all the time.

The people complaining are the people that want the game but refuse to purchase the game because of the DRM. It doesn't help that the pirated version will be superior to the retail copy so potential legal customers get shat on from a great height.

edit- Just like to add that when people complain (preferably directly to the publisher in question) then that publisher are more likely to take notice. It's fine to just protest with your wallet by not paying for something, but unless you tell them why you're not purchasing they're game they may not know what exactly they've done wrong and pull all support. I personally don't see it happening but that's partly because I'm pretty sure a lot of people will have directly vented at Ubisoft. I know enough people did with EA at the install limit thing so they've changed they're DRM system. It's not perfect, but it is better.



Around the Network

My internet connection is fickly. It can go out at the most inconvenient times.

Therefore I will not be able to buy any future Ubisoft games for my PC.

And this for no apparent reason.

Naturally, I am somewhat disappointed.



This is invisible text!

The difference is... WOW has a good reason to need to be online all the time to play.

AC2 doesn't.

There is asbolutely no reason for the game to be needed to be online at all times except for the DRM... which likely has already been cracked.



twesterm said:
blaydcor said:
twesterm said:

I ignored your first comment because it was plain and simple stupid.  It's as stupid as this:

I understand not liking the DRM, but my point is that it's not a surprise.  It's not like you bought the game and then found out that it had the DRM or they didn't put it right in plain sight that it required a permanant internet connection.  I would be absolutely outraged if I bought this game and later found out that I had to put up with that but since it's something you know before you buy it, I don't see why it's such a big deal.

I don't know, to me, it's just like not having the correct computer or meeting the minimum requirements and isn't a big deal.

Would I be upset if I wanted this game and couldn't meet the internet requirement for whatever reasons?  Sure, but no more upset than if I just didn't have the right graphics card.

If you don't like the WoW comparison that's fine, then what if I bought and loved AC for the PC but now I can't run AC2 because it requires a better graphics card than I have?  Should I be just as justifiably angry?  Both of those things are only requirements that every game has a list of.

There's something bitterly ironic about that statement being in the same post as the (not very funny or clever) picture you posted.

MY point is: nobody is acting like it's a surprise. Nobody is upset because it's a surprise. They're mad because of the stupid DRM itself. Which brings us full circle to my original point: It doesn't matter if you're fairly warned about something ahead of time, if it's bad, it's bad. If you get shot in a war, you don't think "Well, this isn't so bad. I was aware this would probably happen when I signed up.", you think "Fuck! I just got shot! This is fucking terrible!".

 

But this brings me back to my point-- you're angry about something you don't even have!

If you don't like the DRM, that's cool, then just don't buy (or pirate) the game!

So you can only have opinions about something you own? Then why are posting all this in the DRM's defense? To be fair, while I disagree with the DRM, I've never once whined, complained, or even MENTIONED it to anyone either online in real life, just kept my opinions to myself, until I saw this thread and felt the need to offer my thoughts.

 



Crusty VGchartz old timer who sporadically returns & posts. Let's debate nebulous shit and expand our perpectives. Or whatever.

I don't like the idea of buying a game with this kind of DRM so I won't. I just don't see the point in bitching about it though... There are far worse travesties to worry about in the world than some silly DRM you don't like. Save a whale or something if you care that much.



Do you know what its like to live on the far side of Uranus?

Around the Network
Kasz216 said:

The difference is... WOW has a good reason to need to be online all the time to play.

AC2 doesn't.

There is asbolutely no reason for the game to be needed to be online at all times except for the DRM... which likely has already been cracked.

it's the first time we agree with something, another thing if DRM servers get bugged u can't play either!



I can't wait for the multiple DDOS attacks on Ubisoft's servers...