You’ve doubtless heard of Ubisoft’s appalling new DRM solution: that PC games from Ubi require a constant internet connection, and will in fact kick you out of the game if your connection drops during play. People who’ve gone hands-on with it describe it as worse than originally expected.
Will be be cracked? Sooner or later, though the cleverness inherent in this solution is considerable. This is one of the very few DRM solutions that might actually work – and by “work,” I don’t mean it might prevent pirates. I mean “work” the way Ubi means it.
You see, in this business, new releases usually have no more than six weeks to make their money at retail. Exceptions are extraordinarily rare; in fact, most games have closer to three weeks before they go from the top shelf to the bottom one. Of course Steam and other channels may change this, but for now that’s the way it is.
Analysts like me refer to this period as a game’s tail. The longer the tail, the longer the game is top-shelf. Myst, for example, and Civilization, both fell into that exception-to-the-six-week-tail bucket. Both games had tails that lasted a couple years, meaning they were still $50 and they got a reasonable amount of shelf space for that time. S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat, meanwhile, was released at the beginning of February and has already been marked down 50% at most retailers, online and otherwise. It will disappear from shelves in another couple of weeks. And this is a game that’s already moved two million units, so it’s not a failure by any means. Once you’re past the tail, you see successive markdowns and less prominence until the title is in the bargain bin, or the dumpster. And that’s the point of Ubi’s DRM scheme.
The technology stores your saved games and configuration files (key bindings and stuff) on Ubisoft servers. If your game and the server don’t do the handshake, not only will you not have access to your saves, but the game won’t even start. And since it is constantly verifying your online status, it can quit within seconds if your connection is terminated. The combination of functions there will be very difficult for crackers to defeat. I’m no coder but I’d say it’s well beyond the skills of the script kiddies who crack most games.
Will it be defeated? Absolutely. I assume the crack will have to be re-engineered for every game, so each new release can’t take advantage of a previous exploit. But it could take weeks for a crack to be manufactured and viralized around the web. See where I’m going with this?
Ubisoft knows the tech will be broken. It doesn’t care. All Ubi cares about is keeping the game protected through the tail. After that, as far as Ubi’s concerned the game can be pirated till the cows come home, because after the tail, sales drop so precipitously that losses to piracy will be a drop in the bucket. So legitimate consumers are left with two choices:
- Buy the game and endure the DRM
- Don’t buy the game
Some people are touting “buy the game for a console” as a third choice, but such a view is hopelessly optimistic and, frankly, a little shortsighted. This generation of consoles are… wait for it… connected to the internet 100% of the time. Individual users can prevent this, of course, so it’s not a universal state, but if you think that publishers won’t or can’t introduce similar DRM to consoles, you’re being silly. Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo, publishers themselves that claim losses to piracy, are unlikely to prevent such tactics.
In fact, your privacy is already being violated if you’re playing on a connected console. It tracks the games you’ve played, the time you’ve played them, your network downloads, friends lists, people you’ve casually encountered in Gears deathmatches, and on and on and on. You can manually protect some of this information, but not all. Even Steam does it. I sit down at my computer and I know what all my friends are playing. With the click of a button in the new beta interface, I can see their total invested time, and you can pester them to talk while they’re trying to play Dragon Age.
Ten years ago Sun Microsystems co founder Scott McNealy famously said “you have zero privacy anyway. Get over it.” When attacked for the remark, he followed up with a litany of examples proving that it’s true: traffic cameras monitor our driving. GPS systems are embedded in our phones. Medical records flit freely from doctor to doctor. Amazon and other online retailers know our names, our addresses, our credit card numbers. Hell, the guy who takes my Chinese food order knows all that about me. There is no privacy.
So people don’t like Ubi’s DRM because it’s another step toward shattering the illusion of privacy that we all cherish. And, I think, people don’t like Ubi’s DRM because it’s… obnoxious. To use the common refrain, it treats all consumers like thieves. The interesting thing about this is the life cycle of videogames – that ever important tail that dictates success or failure of gaming software. I know that the publishers’ claims of losses to piracy are vastly overstated, and I tend to agree with the philosophy that most of the pirates – not all, but most – weren’t going to buy the game under any circumstances. If that’s the case, then most of the losses – not all, but most – are just phantom money.
I don’t mind DRM in general, and I certainly oppose piracy. But I do value my illusion of privacy, and I don’t like intrusive solutions. I don’t want my PC to have 53 different applets, one from every publisher, lurking in my system tray in order to play this game or that one. I don’t like the idea of one of Ubi’s tentacles forever suction-cupped to my cable modem.
But the truth is, maybe what really needs to change is the sales model. This tail-based system is not really tenable in today’s modern world of e-Delivery and Steam Holiday Sales. Other products have short tails too – novels, for example. Movies used to but then came VHS, DVD, and Netflix. Now that’s where most of their money is made, even though there’s piracy in film too. I wonder if we’ll ever get to a point where a person would be just as likely to invest in a beloved classic as a hot new release.
Good one.
Of course, it will be very interesting to see the battle between crackers and UBI’s cryptographers. PC version of Assassin’s Creed II is already circulating the warez scene, although as yet uncracked. Everybody seems to think it will be cracked in a couple of weeks time at worst, which, admittedly is better for UBI than what usually happens (games cracked before release). Of course, I won’t be buying it because I find this practice unnacceptable (and I do have the console version anyway) but the success of this game and its DRM might mean quite a lot in the future. Of course, we ARE moving towards the age where you will be required to be connected to do any playing at all, whatwith the Gaikai and OnLive systems rearing their heads on the horizon. Doesn’t mean I have to like it, eh?
I went to the Ubisoft website and looked at their list of published games. It seems that the last of their games I played was the last Myst game in 2005. In fact the only Ubisoft games I’ve played have been Myst games. So I don’t see that their new DRM crime-against-my-privacy will have much of an effect on me. But I hate the idea. It’s an “Off with their heads!” kind of development. Reminds me of the idea that people will put up with lost privacy in exchange for security. In this case the security is only to benefit Ubisoft. Yes, I allow my privacy to be violated every day – each time I visit Amazon, or read Google News -the list goes on and on. BUT THOSE ARE MY CHOICES. I also have a choice about where and how I spend my money, and I’d refrain from buying a game that allows so much intrusion into my computer/life. A game that tells me how I must live my life even in the smallest of ways such as always being connected to the internet is a game I can forgo.
Consoles CAN be connected to the internet 100% of the time, but there are still many consoles that never go online. Modern Warfare 2 sold over 11 million copies, yet XBox Live only shows 840,000 users that have been on-line with it. That’s not played online, that means they played the game in any mode while connected to XBox Live.
Games that have required an internet connection and were multiplayer only have a history of vanishing quickly from the console marketplace. Phantasy Star ONLINE did much better on the Gamecube then it did on the XBox. What was the difference? Oh yeah, you could play PSO without an internet connection on the Gamecube, the XBox version require a live account and an internet connection. That’s hardly the only example but one that is near and dear to my heart.
No, no, you don’t get it! Ubisoft’s “always connected” requirement isn’t DRM, it’s value-add for you, the beloved customer. Just like the Albertsons supermarket chain requires employees to plaster obnoxiously bright orange “Thank you for shopping with us!” stickers on your Coke and milk not because they think you’re stealing them but to express their sincere gratitude for your patronage.
Maybe my memories of a time when consumers paid for a product and got the product, unadorned by FBI warnings and impossible to open wrappings and authentication servers that can vanish at any time without warning were planted by aliens. In the current cultural climate it’s certainly difficult to believe that time ever existed.
But Steerpike makes a good point: business model, retail model is lagging behind the times. And developers, instead of researching ways to use the existing systems to sell more games rather research new ways to piss off their paying customers.
Seriously, in my opinion, pirates pirate games because they are better value than retail games. Not just in the sense that they get to spend less money on them, but they get them faster, do not have to go through any hassle with DRM and have full control over the game. I think that Gabe Newell put it best saying that Valve sees pirates as customers who haven’t been served yet.
I think UBI and their ilk should look for ways to make retail games more valuable to their customers than (free) warez copies. Yes, stuff like achievements/ trophies helps a little, sure. There are other ways too and one of them is resale value. But, oh, what a surprise, used games market pisses publishers off MORE than pirates do. In fact most of the current DRM schemes are only effective against resales. EA’s ten dollar project and all other free DLC on day one initiatives. So, honestly, I’m afraid that UBI’s online-all-the-time-or-no-service DRM is basically only going to affect sales of used games. The crackers are going to bring their games to pirates eventually. I believe that draconic DRM schemes such as this will only inspire people like GeoHot, Dark Alex and Yoshihiro to spend more of their time on circumvention. Their street cred is going to be huge after all…
What Valve seem to understand is that playing games through Steam should make playing MORE valuable/ comfortable than not playing games through Steam (which is, at the end of the day a DRM system). Being able to instal a game on as many machines as you want and not having to have a disc in the drive is exactly what pirated games give us too, but with Steam you also retain all your stats, friends lists, achievements and everything. So it’s BETTER than playing pirated games. I only hope that UBI wake up and realise they have to ADD value, not just subtract freedoms.
I’m not really sure I see their DRM as a huge problem. If my PC is turned on, so is my internet. I’m fully aware that my name is probably on a million data bases already, and although it might be annoying knowing that Ubisoft have implemented such a security feature, if you don’t physically notice it, I don’t particularly care.
I’m currently playing Myst at the moment, having never before. What an odd game…
Well, you know, just from a philosophical standpoint: if the game is unplayable as soon as you don’t have Internet connection (which, I’m afraid, happens to me more regularly than I am comfortable with) for no other reason than making sure you have paid for it then to me this is pretty much unnacceptable. Requiring a connection for something that is a function of the game itself is OK, but enforcing it just for the sake of protection of the publisher, sorry, no sale.
True Meho. I had 40 minutes the other day before I went out and thought I would have a quick skirmish on Dawn of War II. Steam (despite my love for it) wouldn’t launch the game because for some reason it kept freezing and refusing to connect or launch in offline mode. I couldn’t actually locate the source directory either to boot the game up manually. So, I didn’t get to play and instead spent 40 minutes in a fit of rage cursing Valve and all who work under them.
Not exactly the same situation, but not hugely dissimilar.
I’m really not concerned about the privacy issue simply because that illusion is just that, and doesn’t really comfort or unsettle me. My problem with this whole thing is that internet connections can be temperamental at the best of times and the idea that if the connection falters I will lose my progress (and thus my invested time which I’d argue is more valuable than my money) then quite frankly Ubi can fuck off. I’ve been pretty placid up to press with DRM simply because it’s not seemed that intrusive but this will affect the paying customers more than the pirates. It devalues the product and I fear it will push otherwise paying customers to download cracked versions that don’t suffer from this shit. Which, of course, will play into Ubi’s hands.
Am I right in believing all this stems from the hideous retail model that just refuses to die? Physical retail creates pressuring deadlines, costs considerably more due to increased physical production (and overheads in staffing and floor space), it’s inflexible with stock limitations and shelf space dictating the range of titles available in any given store and by the sounds of things is the sole reason for this ‘tail’. If you look at Steam, it isn’t always the newest games that sell the most due in no small part to their sales and weekend deals.
“I wonder if we’ll ever get to a point where a person would be just as likely to invest in a beloved classic as a hot new release.”
From my experience there are a lot of people who simply can’t stomach old looking games, even some of my friends who’ve been playing games since they were young have turned into total graphics whores. Seriously you want to see the totally underwhelmed look on their faces when I show them XCOM for any period of time. We’re at a stage now where graphics are so advanced that for a lot of people going back so far to sample an allegedly classic title is simply too much. Thankfully GOG is doing a fantastic job of making these titles as accessible, and valuable, as possible.
EDIT: Spot on Meho. My point exactly.
See what I mean though Lew? Time. Valuable stuff. A quick skirmish on DoW turned into a 40 minute skirmish with Steam.
This seems like an awful idea.. or at least one which sounds like a good idea to somebody somewhere, but in reality is unworkable.
Since I’ve been a paying internet customer I have lived at 3 different addresses and used around 5 different ISP’s. I have ALWAYS had problems with my internet connection. With my current set up it tends to go down if a menacing looking cloud passes overhead..
Some people may like to play a game offline now and then; this is especially easy with older ones before the dawn of activation codes and online authentication. While those aren’t that annoying, having to maintain a constant internet connection just to play a game that you paid for, which is not specifically a MMO, really bites.
Gregg B said:
“Am I right in believing all this stems from the hideous retail model that just refuses to die? Physical retail creates pressuring deadlines, costs considerably more due to increased physical production (and overheads in staffing and floor space), it’s inflexible with stock limitations and shelf space dictating the range of titles available in any given store and by the sounds of things is the sole reason for this ‘tail’. If you look at Steam, it isn’t always the newest games that sell the most due in no small part to their sales and weekend deals.”
I agree with this. Just a few years ago I couldn’t see myself paying for intangible, digital goods. Fast forward to now and it’s really my preferred method of computer gaming, whether it’s GOG, Steam, or elsewhere, I find it’s the model that works best for the customer. If I’m not mistaken, I believe once upon a time that was who the industry was trying to serve, no? The customer?
You know, I’m from Brazil and there piracy is HUGE. Maybe for that reason I feel for the industry and understand the efforts to stop it. However, I suspect this crack delay would have a very minor impact in markets like Brazil. People can’t afford the games, so they wouldn’t pay full price anyway.
It is a shame that we don’t have privacy anymore. The other day a friend of mine on XBox Live sent me a message to congratulate me on a goal I scored in Fifa 10. I didn’t know but apparently not only you can see I’m playing Fifa, but you also see when I score and my avatar cheers! While that sounds very cool, it is also very disturbing. But like Matt points very well, privacy is already gone. And since I don’t have it anymore, why not help stop piracy?
On the other hand, the plurality of solutions is a different matter, it becomes a hassle. I think the solution should be platform dependent, not publisher dependent. In Brew phones, the control is embedded in the system and you cannot use an app if it cannot be verified, which means if you are not connected to the network you can’t play.
Unfortunately that cannot be applied to consoles, there’s a considerable number of devices outside the internet umbrella. But if the game constantly checks if you are online and tries to authenticate the copy, online piracy will suffer a big hit and the technological move towards full connectivity will make the practice more and more efficient over time.
Not going to buy the game, long tail or not, it sucks to have that kind of persistent connection needed for offline play. Not even just startup authorisation either. I must admit any Game For Windows Live games can be similar (Dawn of War 2 being one of them necessitating it) although most of them allow offline profiles, and most of them allow the saves to be moved easily between any online or offline accounts.
Oh, and if you’re disconnected it won’t kick you out of the game too, even Microsoft didn’t get that wrong.
I don’t even understand how privacy comes into it, my main issue is twofold:
– The above note about simple, offline play (and disconnects for blips in service)
– The fact it isn’t just your connection that is necessary, it is THEIR connection and servers
The second point as a partial game historian leads me to wonder how many years (not decades) the servers will be there. Publishers have removed much more necessary servers quickly if they are a cost liability (or they want to push people onto a newer game…). Downtime is also, considering some of the services require payment (Xbox Live for instance) devastatingly poor considering the user base sizes, especially on high load days (and I wonder if we’ll see “Assassins Creed 2 unplayable at launch due to server overload” at all, heh). Lucky it’s “just games” though, no worries if we only have 99% uptime right?! 😉
(Also, frankly their Assassins Creed 1 port was poor until they patched it, where at least then it was playable (in full on 16:9…for some reason), which makes me wary of any PC release of a console game they do. I wonder also if they still have unskippable cutscenes, I’ve not checked it out on the consoles).
The fact they’ll never have enough sales of this PC version due to the earlier console release to either say this is a roaring success or roaring failure. It’s the longest end of the tail in the first place. Or they’ll lie about whatever happens anyway. It’s utterly bizarre…I just don’t understand it.
Cesar: I’m in Serbia and here piracy reigns supreme (much worse than Brazil, I imagine) but still, this is pure and simple bullshit. I purcahsed BioShock 2 today, for my PS3 even though I’d prefer to play it on my PC just because of the stupid DRM that won’t let me control the use of a game I pay for. They can fuck off with that. So, my purchase was influenced by DRM, depsite the game being more natural to play on a PC. Protection measures should not create this kind of bitterness in a human being.
The issue of server overload on release days is significant. Think about it – a game like Modern Warfare 2? Or any other hotly anticipated release? Of course the servers would go down. It’s not cost-effective to install a server infrastructure capable of handling Day Zero traffic. That would royally piss people off.
Ubi and others who use draconian DRM typically insist that if they ever go out of business or shut servers down, they’ll issue patches so the games can be played offline.
Around the holidays here, big stores like Best Buy station a guy at the exit. His job is to go through your bag and consult your receipt to make sure you haven’t stolen anything. That’s a very similar ideology to this one: treat all consumers like thieves in hopes of catching the few who are.
Considering most MMOG servers cannot cope on launch day, I see it as a gaurentee that when the next Modern Warfare is released, if they do follow through with this, would see many unhappy players.
This new DRM policy will totally be screwing me over because I have a wireless internet setup, but my signal is a bit weak so here and there it drops out for a 10-15 second period before it reconnects. Plus my wireless router is a bit wonky and will just stop working once in awhile until I cycle power to it. So, until my setup changes, I will be forced to avoid all Ubi PC games that use this.
I seriously doubt a person which would normally pirate a game, will pay money for it just because she has to wait a short while longer for the cracked version. This can work only for very cheap games – like 1$ cheap.
Just for those keeping tabs: the Russian version of Assassin’s Creed II has apparently been successfully cracked, with a fix for the saves too. Of course, I don’t KNOW this for sure but that’s the word circulating through the grapewine.
Brazil is a strong competitor in the piracy rates. 95%-97% if I am not mistaken.
Anyway, I don’t have a problem with the privacy issue. Not even with the assumption that we are all thieves. If you extrapolate that idea, you will conclude we shouldn’t have patrol cars on the streets. They assume people will commit crimes and have to keep watch. Homo homini lupus. Society isn’t perfect and even though losses are part of the model, no one is ready to lose out of good faith alone. I don’t mean to say DRM and police watch are the same thing, I’m just saying it’s not that simple to draw a line where it becomes offensive to monitor society.
That being said, it is not acceptable to have a DRM impact gameplay at all. I don’t mind it authenticating my copy. But if I am offline it has to work. And if I loose connection during the game I shouldn’t be kicked out.
And while the efficacy of the solution might be questionable under these circumstances, like I said in the previous comment, it only tends to increase.
“Ubi and others who use draconian DRM typically insist that if they ever go out of business or shut servers down, they’ll issue patches so the games can be played offline.”
I have seen this happen to absolutely zero games ever. The fact that it is nearly impossible to sanction any work on IP if a company is in administration is the key. That and it is non-trivial to get around your own disk DRM by producing an installer that will work with your disk copy to install it.
I’d love to be proved wrong…this is by far the most worrying thing of the deal, just installed Bioshock 2 and it has online activation (sigh)…worried I might need to download cracked versions to install it in the future!
Oh, did you see the patch notes of the first patch? It makes the DRM very very very slightly “better” (I mean, better as in “still shit”):
http://www.fileshack.com/file.x/17456/Assassin%27s+Creed+2+Patch+1.01+-+US
“Game can now be continued from the exact same point when connection is restored”
Ho ho ho. Ho.
Oh:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/ubi-under-fire-as-drm-servers-go-down
I like this bit:
“Only those who purchased a copy of ACII or SHV legally appear to be affected. Pirates playing illegally downloaded cracked versions of the game are able to play without a problem.”
Is it apparent pirates are having no problems yet? If they’ve properly cracked it then what I feared (above) is true. Last I heard was that the DRM apparently downloads levels or important files as you play. I don’t know whether this is true or not though.
Meho beat me to it. I just read a similar article on The Register. I don’t suppose that the DDoS attack will make Ubi rethink its evil ways, but this might (I can dream, can’t I?):
“Meanwhile Ubisoft’s much criticised controls have been broken by software hackers. A hacker group called Skid-Row managed to bypass DRM restrictions on Silent Hunter 5 less than 24 hours after the game was published. Skid Row has releasing a crack for the game based on this work, Zdnet reports. ®”
Full article here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/08/ubisoft_anti_drm_hack_attack/
Spike. RE: The Register article
There is a comment to that article that claims the crack for SH5 is not a complete crack and would only allow an incomplete experience, because not only are save games stored online but some of the game data files are stored online too, implying that the boxed game you buy is incomplete. This seems plausible and effective IMO, because if I was demanding an internet connection for my software this is how I would do it. It demands not only that a games code be cracked but that missing data files be supplied too.
Having just read this article – link below – I’m thinking that DRM will be fine and dandy AND hunky-dory with me as long as the packaging it comes in is “green”. Yep. That makes it more palatable.
http://www.fastcompany.com/1620105/ubisoft-green-recycled-case-digital-manual-sustainable-packaging
I would kind of like to buy games in potato cases.
I was thinking… and remembered one of the most creative instances of “DRM” if you can call it that: King’s Quest VI! I looked it up and sure enough it is mentioned on KQVI’s Wikipedia page:
A booklet titled “Guidebook to the Land of the Green Isles” (written by Jane Jensen) is included in the KQVI package. Aside from providing additional background to the game’s setting, this booklet serves as part of the game’s copy-protection. The player will not be able to pass the puzzles on the Cliffs of Logic that guard the Isle of the Sacred Mountain without information from the booklet. The booklet also includes a poem encoding the solution to one of the puzzles in the labyrinth on the Isle of the Sacred Mountain.
I guess that’s not very feasible today, what with widespread use of the internet around the world. I still think it’s more creative than the “thank you for your money, we intend to treat you like a criminal” method.
I played the KQVI game with the booklet. I was a kid at the time, and thought the booklet was so cool! It really added to the whole game’s experience.
The quest for Glory games came with fun booklets as well, though I don’t remember if they had copy protection elements to ’em.
Ahh, the good old days..