Ubisoft finally ditches always on DRM


Recommended Posts

In an interview with RPS, due to go live in a few hours, Ubisoft? worldwide director for online games, Stephanie Perlotti, has said the Ubisoft has officially stopped using ?always-on? DRM and will not implement it in future games.

?We have listened to feedback,? he said, ?and since June last year our policy for all of PC games is that we only require a one-time online activation when you first install the game, and from then you are free to play the game offline.?

Previously Ubisoft titles required players to be online at all times whilst playing ? if your online connection dropped out the game would stop. It?s long been thought of as one of the most counter-intuitive, punishing forms of DRM conceived. Now it looks as though all Ubisoft games will require one simple activation, and players will then be allowed to play the game they?ve purchase on or offline.

Great news, and the right decision all round.

The full interview is set to up on RPS in a couple of hours.

Ubisoft Scrapping Always-On DRM For PC Games [RPS]

*applauds*

My opinion of ubisoft just nudged a little closer to the positive side of the spectrum.

It would be nice to see them release patches to get rid of the DRM on the games some of us already own. However, I doubt that'll happen.

  • Like 3

This is Ubisoft. They're probably getting rid of online DRM by abandoning PC gaming.

I was just about to say.. after reading the head line my first thought was 'ohhh no!' because ubisoft, ea and the rest of the DRM enforcement crews only usually ditch one DRM in favor of another more restrictive. I was expecting ubisoft to require a gps locator attached dongle on your PC and a copy of your passport to be sent in as proof its you or somethig stupid.

As a PC gamer, this is welcome, but unnecessary. I abandoned all Ubisoft games years ago. I got tired of crap like always-on DRM and them punishing me for wanting to play their games on my PC.

Fool me once...

  • Like 2

I wonder if Ubi trully understands just how much they've alienated so many of their customers. And just how many will never have anything to do with them ever again. :glare:

  • Like 3

PC gaming is far from dead. Infact due to consoles seeming more redundant these days, PC gaming has exciting days ahead.

Ubisoft must be well aware by now that intrusive DRM does nothing to prevent piracy, just humiliates genuine buyers while pirates point and laugh at them. Hence the decision. With that being said, I still won't buy their recycled Assassins Creed games.

Heh, cracks will be released faster this way :p (not that I have touched a Ubisoft game in ages, by the way). Anyway my opinion is that PC gaming would perform pretty well if the market was populated more by indie developers and less by big-budget monsters like Ubicrap whose only idea is to please shareholderds. I don't give a crap about shareholders, I want fun and games not "on-line plus services+achievements" and that's all.

hmm I think big triple A titles like MW, AC, ME, BF, Borderlands, and such when they're available on the platform do far more for the PC market than indie titles.

Besides there's no lack of indie devs on PC. it's where most of them are, even if many make more money of consoles. Though I guess that would be a problem for a person who insists on not buying anything that doesn't come on a physical disk.

John Walker over at Rock, Paper, Shotgun did a great interview and really took Perotti and Burk to task over the bull**** DRM, not releasing statistics related to DRM (or 1 minute saying it was a success and the next saying piracy rates were at 93-95%) and the damage the always on crap has done to Ubi reputation. It's a good article. I suggest people read.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/09/05/ubisoft-drm-piracy-interview/

It would be nice to see them release patches to get rid of the DRM on the games some of us already own. However, I doubt that'll happen.

I think they did. Splinter Cell: Conviction hasn't done any weird network related glitching in ages for me (And my ISP is definately glitchy.)

There was so recent comment I saw that indicated that they believed 90%+ of their players are playing a pirated copy.

Which begs the question, when they have a game that has 5 or so million sales, are they suggesting there's another 50 million or so people playing a pirated copy?

Or that a significant percentage of the human population in the world that has ready access to electricity is, at this moment, playing Rainbow Six.

In fact, 15 out of 10 people on this forum are playing it right now...

reaction.jpg

Too bad PC gamers ditched Ubisoft.

Too little, too late. Restore Rainbow Six, Splinter Cell and Ghost Recon to their original respective glories, and we might have something to talk about.

  • Like 1

reaction.jpg

Too bad PC gamers ditched Ubisoft.

Too little, too late. Restore Rainbow Six, Splinter Cell and Ghost Recon to their original respective glories, and we might have something to talk about.

According to Ubisoft's statistics, you're playing all of those games. Now. At the same time. And it's a pirated version.

  • Like 1

I'm not playing any Ubisoft games except Trials:Evolution on the xbox360. I only bought AC1 and completed most of it. Those are the last 2 Ubisoft games I've touched. I'm excited trials:evolution is coming to PC!!!

According to Ubisoft's statistics, you're playing all of those games. Now. At the same time. And it's a pirated version.

Statistics they refuse to show anyone else. They screwed up and in typical PR bull**** they are trying to avoid any blame.

Stupid company is stupid.

reaction.jpg

Too bad PC gamers ditched Ubisoft.

Too little, too late. Restore Rainbow Six, Splinter Cell and Ghost Recon to their original respective glories, and we might have something to talk about.

Mmm a real RB6 and Ghost Recon game.... The new splinter cell I actually like better than the old ones.

Yeah, the original article (not the one sourced by most of these, but also from RockPaperShotgun) said it happened in June 2011.

So it's certainly in time for whatever. (And funny that people still believed it was present, but anyway.)

The new splinter cell I actually like better than the old ones.

Hell yeah. Chaos Theory and Double Agent were fun but kind of annoying. I keep wanting to finish them and not getting anywhere.

As some of you know, we don't put copy protection in our internally developed games and I feel confident in saying that it has no noticeable impact on sales.

We released Galactic Civilizations II in 2006. SIX years ago right? I think it would be safe to say that whatever piracy could happen to that game must have happened by now. But we still made well into the six figures on that game in July.

Needless to say, I don't buy into the piracy argument. I never have. I've gotten flamed on this so many times over the years as if I'm some sort of gamer hippy. But it's not naivete, it's just business. People who pay money for stuff are a lot less likely to pay for stuff if they think they're going to get hassled for doing so.

There was so recent comment I saw that indicated that they believed 90%+ of their players are playing a pirated copy.

Which begs the question, when they have a game that has 5 or so million sales, are they suggesting there's another 50 million or so people playing a pirated copy?

Or that a significant percentage of the human population in the world that has ready access to electricity is, at this moment, playing Rainbow Six.

In fact, 15 out of 10 people on this forum are playing it right now...

No. They said on PC 90% of copies are pirated. Out of that 5 million sold, the majority of sales will be on console. The makers of the Witcher announced they passed 1 million sales, and at that point in time there were 4.5 million copies pirated so far. That's a ~80% piracy rate, not far off from Ubisoft's number, and Ubisoft games are more popular.

My question is: Do you think piracy cost them a measurable amount of sales?

My follow-up would be, do you think their anti-piracy methods cost them more sales than they gained through converting would be pirates.

And my last question is, is the goal of copy protection about increasing sales or keeping non-payers from playing?

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Dbrand thought they could get away with this Steam Machine case, Valve disagreed by David Uzondu Image via Dbrand Dbrand has cancelled its highly anticipated Companion Cube enclosure for the Valve Steam Machine, which it teased back in November of last year with a concept render and sign-up page, because it did not ask Valve for permission first before manufacturing the case. According to Dbrand, it took the "backwards approach" of building the product first before asking for permission from the copyright holder. Seven months of work went into the project, requiring over a thousand engineering hours from the design team. Workers developed forty-four sets of injection molding tools, making a unique mold for each sub-component of the crate. When the Companion Cube went live on Monday last week, it, according to Dbrand, quickly became the second-fastest-selling product in the company's fifteen-year history, racking up orders for hundreds of thousands of units. Customers eagerly bought the $129.95 deluxe edition or the bare-bones $99.95 version, which the manufacturer cheekily branded as the "Poverty Cube". It was around this time that the legal eagles at Valve descended on the accessory maker with a formal demand. The developer pointed out that the iconic block design remains protected intellectual property from the game Portal, so unlicensed sales had to stop. Dbrand said that all its pleas to salvage the project with the Valve team, including proposals to run a properly licensed release under official terms "with their blessing", fell on deaf ears, so it had no choice but to obey and remove every trace of the product from the internet. If you bought the enclosure, the company said that banks will process your refund by the end of this week, but if it still hasn't arrived in your account by then, you should not hesitate to contact support. The Steam Machine itself is a high-performance console that Valve designed directly to bring PC gaming into the living room. It was announced on 12th November 2025 (the same day Dbrand announced the Cube) and runs on the Linux-based SteamOS, the same OS that powers the Steam Deck. As for the price, due to the shortage of memory and storage chips, the hardware cost landed much higher than people were expecting, starting at $1,049 for the 512 model (without a controller) or $1,128 with the new gamepad. The premium 2 TB model pushes those prices even higher, selling at $1,349 for the standalone console and hitting $1,428 if you want the bundle.
    • It's listed #399.99 on Amazon, per your link. It's not $299.99.
    • Wonder how much of this it related to them using something like Mythos. It seems everybody is releasing large numbers of updates in the last few weeks.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Rookie
      Almohandis went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Apprentice
      jahara21 went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Reacting Well
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      BA the Curmudgeon earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      535
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      263
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      148
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      97
    5. 5
      macoman
      59
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!