Hacker Group Claims Real Ubisoft DRM Crack

[Grampy_bone]

Keep in mind that taking a month and a half for an AAA game to be cracked is basically unheard of. No one expects DRM to completely stop piracy, just to deter it somewhat. The idea is to stop the casual pirates who do it because it's convenient. Recall that even though it only took a few weeks to crack Bioshock, Irrational was very happy with their DRM because it stopped zero day piracy.

Did Assassin's Creed 2 receive a boost in sales because of the DRM, or was it hurt by it? I know the opinion of the majority on this board, but only Ubisoft knows for sure. I think this kind of DRM is here to stay, for the foreseeable future anyway.

Someone else mentioned it, but this was a brand spanking new form of DRM. The last few times a brand spanking new form of DRM was released into the wild, (tages, securom, starforce) it took between six and eighteen months to crack.

From zero to emulation took about 2 weeks (with another week to farm out the ubisoft server responses), then from zero to fully cracked took another two weeks. In the scheme of DRM crack times, this is utterly fucking pathetic, and has proven itself to be the weakest DRM system ever implemented.

That's one way to look at it, sure. Still it doesn't change the fact that it prevented zero-day piracy. Most software sales occur in the first month anyway. No one in the industry expects piracy to be 100% effective. It's like saying because locks can be picked you shouldn't bother locking your house.

I'm no fan of DRM but if a system works I'm willing to deal with it. The problem is the anti-DRM crowd likes to flood the discussion with a lots of overblown reactions and nonsense. SecuROM has never deleted my hard drive, blown up my monitor, given me cancer, made me sterile, etc. The biggest DRM rants seem to occur when a new system is released which actually works to prevent piracy to some degree. Coincidence? I think not.

Bottom line is people will spout one justification after another after the fact to excuse their behavior, the but their actions are always the same: pirate, pirate, and pirate some more.

 

[Flex_S]

I wonder if they did this to settlers 7, because that looked like an interesting game.

I'll probably just mail Ubisoft $50 if I decide to pirate it... dunno.

"Hey, guys, I pirated your game cause your DRM is rubbish, but here's some money for trying.

No hard feelings."

 

[Andy Chalk]

Dude, that is such a crap argument when it comes to gamers loving good games. That would be like being an art connoisseur not liking the design of certain frames around paintings, and then avoiding all paintings that use that frame. If you like art, you are going to fucking look at all the paintings, even if it has an ugly frame!

You know, if you're going to tell someone they have a "crap argument," you really should come up with a better one of your own. Say, one that's not predicated on the idea that you're somehow divinely entitled to play every game you want without restriction because you really like games.

 

[Andy Chalk]

Oh, GAWD, cut the capitalist raving already! The elections are over, you can stop now.
I don't think you understood the reason for this topic. For once, it's not about copyright law, it's about DRM and how fucking annoying it is. Did you even think about what you are promoting here? Sure, piracy is bad...FOR BUSINESS.

And the videogame industry is a business. Making games is a business. I'm really not seeing your point here.

 

[Kanodin0]

@Grampy_bone "I'm no fan of DRM but if a system works I'm willing to deal with it." Why? You gain nothing from a successful DRM, you only lose various abilities. With this DRM you lose the ability to play it offline, to play it at all with an unreliable connection and the ability to actually own the game. Further, piracy does not actually effect legitimate consumers. You could argue that in a long-term view piracy effects consumers and you would be right, but in a long-term view this DRM failed and will not stop pirates but only slow them down.

"Game companies have a right to protect their intellectual property" I do not believe anyone has said this yet but it's the assumption that underlines pretty much all pro-DRM arguments. I agree with the idea, but there is a needed corollary: "Game consumers have the right to protect themselves from invasive DRM."

From my point of view I have no interest in how effective a DRM scheme is, only how much it hinders me as the person actually purchasing the game. By that metric Ubisoft's latest DRM is simply intolerable. Just to be clear this doesn't mean I intend to pirate Assassins Creed 2, just that I refuse to buy it.

 

[Starke]

I hope all the people part of skid row end up homeless with ubisoft dancing on there money from a copyright violation lawsuit.

I'm not sure its a copyright violation to disable DRM.

It might violate the EULA, but if they explicitly say they aren't doing it for money, then most courts will end up viewing it the same way other cheats/mods for games are viewed.

That is to say, it has no legal ramifications what so ever.

Well, in American Federal courts that handle copyright violations anyway, I don't know about French courts... (But if Skid Row aren't French Citizens, can they be dragged to a French court over DRM? I doubt it.)

Well, if they are in the US, they could be brought up on charges for violating the anti-circumvention clause of the DMCA. Also, if the ACTA "treaty" gets pushed through by lobbyists (who I hope burn in the lowest level of hell), the rest of the world can expect to have copy right laws that make the draconian DMCA look like a picnic.

If they're brought up on charges for violating anti-circumvention, they should argue that they're protected under the interoperability clause. Given that the DRM prevents the software from running on any system without a constant internet connection, they were encouraging interoperability with other windows systems. It's been a while since I've actually read the DMCA, but I think that could work.

 

[scotth266]

The DRM is only there in the first place because douchebag pirates steal Ubisoft's intellectual property.

Oh, GAWD, cut the capitalist raving already! The elections are over, you can stop now.

Just an FYI, most people would stop taking you seriously as soon as they saw this sentence. But I'll be nice and play along.

I don't think you understood the reason for this topic. For once, it's not about copyright law, it's about DRM and how fucking annoying it is. Did you even think about what you are promoting here? Sure, piracy is bad...FOR BUSINESS.

Spoiler: Reading is cool shit. You should do it sometime.

From my previous post, which you apparently did NOT read:

Okay, I get that people don't like buying games with DRM. I also understand that Ubisoft's cloud-based DRM scheme is quite possibly the worst idea ever in the long list of bad DRM ideas. However, people seem to neglect the fact that nobody is forcing you at gunpoint to buy Ubisoft's shit, and therefore if you don't like what Ubisoft does, you should just... not buy their shit! It's that simple!

...

As long as people continue to buy games saddled with DRM, they're going to get more DRM. And if they start pirating, tougher DRM will be made to try and stop them. Simple as that.

...

B) Anyone who bought the games with the cloud DRM deserve what they got. Even if they buy these games ONLY to crack them, they have helped to support Ubisoft's cloud-DRM strategy. Each sale Ubisoft gets tells them that there's either one more person who doesn't mind their DRM, or doesn't know that it's in the game (in which case it's their fault anyway for not doing some damn research.) This means that the crack has practically nil use to legit consumers: it's only helping pirates do their thing.

C) The only reason the DRM is up to be cracked is because people are pirating the games in the first place. It makes NO sense whatsoever to get pissed at Ubisoft: they're not the source of the problem. The source of the problem is the increasing number of pirates. So hate those douchenozzles instead. Skid Row is enabling the people responsible for the DRM in the first place to make things worse for all of us. So why should I be happy for them again?

Honestly, I think Ubisoft deserved to make no sales off of its DRM-ridden titles. That's why I refused to buy any of them, or pirate any of them (because every additional pirate is another excuse for Ubisoft to just try tougher DRM.)

Ripping a complete game apart so they can sell the parts as DLCs and use micro-transactions so we can buy back (on top of the $60 retail price) what was already in the game before they decided to chop it up.

Premium memberships, VIP editions, pre-order madness...Hell, they even want us to pay for fucking demos now!

For companies like Ubisoft, video games are no longer a form of entertainment, but a way to exploit the fuck out of players. They are milking you dry with all sorts of marketing ploys and you are rooting for THEM?

That "ripping apart the game for DLC business" has always been patently bullshit. I direct you to Virgil's post [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.154083-Dragon-Age-Designer-Says-DLC-Not-Meant-to-Rip-Off-Players#3719305] on the matter.

Premium memberships? What are you raving about now? And VIP/Collector's Editions aren't cheating anyone out of their money. People buy the stuff they want to buy: if they want to pay 140 bones for a figurine with their game, well, what's the problem?

I am opposed to pre-order offers only if they're unique to stores: especially used game chains like Gamestop. Stuff like the Star Trek Online debacle, where you have to carefully select where you want to pre-order for the correct bonus, is ridiculous.

On the other had, if you get your pre-order bonus regardless of where you order your game, then I don't really care: once again, nobody is being forced to buy this stuff if they don't want to. You can lay $5 down for your pre-order and then NEVER PICK THE GAME UP if you hear that it's bad! Then you can guarantee yourself the bonus without actually having to pay for the game if it winds up sucking! Once again, I fail to see the problem.

If people actually pay for demos, then the game industry will have been justified in charging for them, simple as that. I think/hope that the "charging money for demos" plan will fail miserably: but if it succeeds, then it will be the fault of the gaming community for not having the balls to make a stand and refusing to buy them.

Game companies being shrewd businessmen doesn't even come CLOSE to justifying piracy.

However, people seem to neglect the fact that nobody is forcing you at gunpoint to buy Ubisoft's shit, and therefore if you don't like what Ubisoft does, you should just... not buy their shit! It's that simple!

Dude, that is such a crap argument when it comes to gamers loving good games.

Here lies the crux of the problem: the gaming community's lack of a backbone. If even half the people who ***** about DRM refused to buy OR pirate games with DRM in them, the game companies would be forced to sit up and take notice.

Arguing that gamers can't stop buying DRM-laden games because they love the games is sort of like arguing that drunks can't stop buying booze because it feels good to drink a lot, regardless of the fact that they'll get a hangover. There are plenty of DRM-free good games out there: go buy those.

Your museum analogy fails to take into account that the museum is a BUSINESS, and when people walk into the museum without paying, they are doing so ILLEGALLY. That's why when you get caught on the premises without a ticket, you get fined and thrown in jail. The illegality of the crime is not lessened by the good intentions of the perpetrators.

 

[Asehujiko]

I think every person who works with Skid row, are anti gaming activists who want to destroy the gaming industry and should all be homeless bums. and Im not joking, I like the crazy anti gaming lawyer more then them.

If they were against gaming, they would have sent a congratulatory letter to ubishit about how good their drm was working. They kind of did the opposite and allowed legal users to play without being dependent on ubishits horribly unreliable authentication servers, increasing the products value(100% reliability and no lag > 25% reliability and 2-3 second lagspikes every synch point) and thus the amount of money ubishit makes. So what exactly is skidrow doing that is so reprehensible? And don't say "pirates" because they have been playing the game with the several weeks old server emulator already.

 

[Asehujiko]

no matter how you spin it, they are criminals, anti gaming activists, and I hope they all end there lifes as pathetic people starving on the street. I hate pirates, no matter why they do it. This debate has made me want to support ubisoft financial, even thought I have no interest in actually playing any games with this drm, I will be buying it just to support them.

You haven't answered my question.

 

[oktalist]

Publishers take note, putting DRM on a game means it will be pirated MORE!

Which is why World Of Goo (from 2D Boy) had a 90% piracy rate, and Demigod (Stardock) had so many pirated copies that their servers crashed. Both of these companies had anti-DRM stances.

I never said that in general having no DRM would mean a game would be pirated less.

[EDIT]
And I could equally have said "Crackers take note, cracking DRM will just cause publishers to make more crippling DRM!" but that's obviously not much of a deterrent to them.
[/EDIT]

My point was that because piracy is seen as being more of a problem now because games cost so much to produce, they should just spend less on production. Indie developers have shown the way. In that way, publishers could churn out more games faster, and of a higher quality (because art generally comes out better if produced under constraints). But that would dilute their hegemony in the marketplace, so they wouldn't do that.

Stronger and stronger DRM is just more and more of an enticement for the crackers, who are no more or less guilty than the DRM-using publishers as far as apportioning blame for the introduction of crippling DRM.

I would be pissed off if a shoplifter got beat up by the shop's owner, even though the SOURCE of the problem was the shoplifter. We have police and courts for a reason, so victims of crime don't need to stoop to the same level as the criminals.

Actually, for that shop analogy to be complete, the owner would have to also beat up some innocent bystanders in his rage.

But time will surely tell who is right, here. If DRM fails to make a significant dent in piracy figures (and even makes things worse) then sooner or later publishers are going to realise that DRM is not the answer (and there may have been a more obvious answer staring them in the face if only they would've opened their eyes earlier). And if a way is found to make DRM work (impossible IMO) then that way will gradually get polished so as to mitigate the impact on paying customers. Either way, everyone's happy, except perhaps the pirates

 

[Playbahnosh]

Oh, GAWD, cut the capitalist raving already! The elections are over, you can stop now.
I don't think you understood the reason for this topic. For once, it's not about copyright law, it's about DRM and how fucking annoying it is. Did you even think about what you are promoting here? Sure, piracy is bad...FOR BUSINESS.

And the videogame industry is a business. Making games is a business. I'm really not seeing your point here.

I would've guessed you'd say that... In that logic, everything on planet Earth is pure business.

Actually, video games are entertainment, you know, fun. But since the so called video game industry has been invented, it's just business. The majority of game designers no longer make games to entertain people or show their vision to the world, but to get profits. Yeah, sometimes is hard to control my seething anti-capitalist views, but when I see what those publishers and greedy assholes done to video games, it makes me wanna go on a crotch-punching spree.

Games are no longer designed to convey meaning, a great story or just fun gameplay. Now, most of them are meticulously constructed by hordes of marketing personnel, business people and lawyers, to be addictive, full of resource-heavy eye-candy (hardware manufacturers need their cut), advance corporate and political agendas and to brainwash people into paying a hundred times more for a game than what its worth. Seriously, designer meetings are no longer about how to convey something to the player or how to present a more fun gameplay, but how to appeal to certain demographics to gain market share, what stuff to cut from games to use as DLC and designing ridiculous 'achievements' for ADHD riddled teenagers. I'm a journalist, just like you, I saw this shit happen through the years, the shift from entertainment to enterprise, from fun to profit, and I don't like it.

That is my point.

 

[Andy Chalk]

Yeah, sometimes is hard to control my seething anti-capitalist views, but when I see what those publishers and greedy assholes done to video games, it makes me wanna go on a crotch-punching spree.

But if you hate what they've "done" to videogames so much, it follows that you'd have no interest in playing them - and thus no reason to pirate them.

And if there was ever some magical era when videogames weren't about making a buck, I must've missed it: My copy of the 1985 release of The Bard's Tale has a $76.95 price tag on it.

 

[Cynical skeptic]

Publishers take note, putting DRM on a game means it will be pirated MORE!

Which is why World Of Goo (from 2D Boy) had a 90% piracy rate, and Demigod (Stardock) had so many pirated copies that their servers crashed. Both of these companies had anti-DRM stances.

All this crack is telling Ubisoft is they need TOUGHER DRM. Why? Because the hard DRM they put up was cracked! And now you have people in this thread actually CONGRATULATING the people that cracked it, helping enable piracy, causing companies to want more restrictive DRM as they watch Ubisoft's piracy rates rise.

The DRM is only there in the first place because douchebag pirates steal Ubisoft's intellectual property. So if you want to vent your spleen, go do so at the SOURCE of the problem, and not the victims of it.

EDIT:

Spoiler: Spoilered because I swear once or twice, and I don't wish to offend anyones delicate eyeballs.

Okay, I get that people don't like buying games with DRM. I also understand that Ubisoft's cloud-based DRM scheme is quite possibly the worst idea ever in the long list of bad DRM ideas. However, people seem to neglect the fact that nobody is forcing you at gunpoint to buy Ubisoft's shit, and therefore if you don't like what Ubisoft does, you should just... not buy their shit! It's that simple!

For some bizzare reason I cannot even BEGIN to fathom, some people in this thread are actually PRAISING the people who have cracked Ubisoft's DRM system. The people singing Skid Row's praises don't quite seem to grasp that these hackers have only helped to perpetuate a vicious cycle of consumerism stupidity. SR's work has only helped ensure that things are going to get WORSE for the average gamer, because:

A) The game companies are going to look at this, and the corresponding increase in Ubisoft's game piracy rates as pirates flock to torrent sites like flies to the corpse, and realize that Ubisoft's system of DRM does not work. This doesn't mean that things are going to get better though, because as pirates have proven, leaving your games free of DRM [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.77023-World-of-Goo-Experiences-90-Percent-Piracy-Rate] doesn't do jack to piracy rates. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/91001-Demigod-Piracy-Running-High] This means that a good number of companies are probably only going to tighten the reins further, making up more insane DRM in an attempt to finally thwart piracy. Of course, there's also the possibility that the amount of DRM in games will remain the same: but in my opinion I think it unlikely that the game companies are going to go "Aw shucks, better give up" thanks to this hack. Rather, they're probably thinking "Huh, that didn't work... how about we try THIS?"

As long as people continue to buy games saddled with DRM, they're going to get more DRM. And if they start pirating, tougher DRM will be made to try and stop them. Simple as that.

B) Anyone who bought the games with the cloud DRM deserve what they got. Even if they buy these games ONLY to crack them, they have helped to support Ubisoft's cloud-DRM strategy. Each sale Ubisoft gets tells them that there's either one more person who doesn't mind their DRM, or doesn't know that it's in the game (in which case it's their fault anyway for not doing some damn research.) This means that the crack has practically nil use to legit consumers: it's only helping pirates do their thing.

C) The only reason the DRM is up to be cracked is because people are pirating the games in the first place. It makes NO sense whatsoever to get pissed at Ubisoft: they're not the source of the problem. The source of the problem is the increasing number of pirates. So hate those douchenozzles instead. Skid Row is enabling the people responsible for the DRM in the first place to make things worse for all of us. So why should I be happy for them again?

Two points: A: the actual figure was 82%. Its just gotten "telephoned" up to 90%-98% by people seeking to use it to prove... something.

B: The only advertising or profile that game had was when it was [massive sarcasm]"cracked"[/massive sarcasm]. Even the awesome, award winning initial form of that game (tower of goo) had long been forgotten by the generalities of the internet before the game had even come out. A vast majority (>82%) never would have even known about it if not for some scrub "crack" group attempting to claim they did anything what so ever to make the game freely distributable. How many people bought it after seeing how awesome it was? Who knows. But while you have 2D boy not even really complaining about the piracy figures (closer to being amused) and everyone else parading it around as a crime against humanity, you have film makers [http://www.rlslog.net/piracy-isnt-that-bad-and-they-know-it/] praising piracy for giving their film sufficient profile for a bluray re-release.

So... yea, if you want to be an industry cheerleader, stop using 2d boy as your pompom.

Also, demigod was a half-assed clone of a WARCRAFT 3 custom map. The makers of that game deserved absolutely fucking nothing.

Yeah, sometimes is hard to control my seething anti-capitalist views, but when I see what those publishers and greedy assholes done to video games, it makes me wanna go on a crotch-punching spree.

But if you hate what they've "done" to videogames so much, it follows that you'd have no interest in playing them - and thus no reason to pirate them.

And if there was ever some magical era when videogames weren't about making a buck, I must've missed it: My copy of the 1985 release of The Bard's Tale has a $76.95 price tag on it.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I'm pretty sure the exorbitant pricetag of the bard's tale was a big reason it didn't sell very well.

 

[tzimize]

It took a month and a half to break the unbreakable pirate proof code, code which has basically prevented legitimate users from enjoying the game a lot of times.

It might have taken a little longer, but this shows just how pointless this round of DRM was. Pirates: 1 Ubisoft: I think we may well be into minus figures now.

Minus figures made me chuckle irl :>

OT: Is anyone really surprised?

 

[scotth266]

Two points: A: the actual figure was 82%. Its just gotten "telephoned" up to 90%-98% by people seeking to use it to prove... something.

B: The only advertising or profile that game had was when it was [massive sarcasm]"cracked"[/massive sarcasm].

Even if it's only 80%, that is still ridiculously large. And as far as your second point goes, that's an opinion, not a fact.

There were large amounts of overwhelmingly positive reviews of the game, and it was even promoted on websites like Penny Arcade. So I think it got quite a bit of marketing, other than from the douchebags that decided to get it off a torrent site.

Also, 2D Boy reported in the original story off joystiq [http://www.joystiq.com/2008/11/13/world-of-goo-has-90-piracy-rate/] that the number of people who bought the game after pirating it was, unsurprisingly, very small.

But while you have 2D boy not even really complaining about the piracy figures (closer to being amused) and everyone else parading it around as a crime against humanity, you have film makers [http://www.rlslog.net/piracy-isnt-that-bad-and-they-know-it/] praising piracy for giving their film sufficient profile for a bluray re-release.

Huh. So the opinion of ONE indie film maker suddenly over-rides the anti-piracy feelings that all the other movie makers and game makers out there have been expressing? Color me surprised.

Also, demigod was a half-assed clone of a WARCRAFT 3 custom map.

That doesn't even come close to justifying piracy of it.

 

[Signa]

Dude, that is such a crap argument when it comes to gamers loving good games. That would be like being an art connoisseur not liking the design of certain frames around paintings, and then avoiding all paintings that use that frame. If you like art, you are going to fucking look at all the paintings, even if it has an ugly frame!

You know, if you're going to tell someone they have a "crap argument," you really should come up with a better one of your own. Say, one that's not predicated on the idea that you're somehow divinely entitled to play every game you want without restriction because you really like games.

I'm really not advocating not paying for games just because you like them (it was also 1am, so coming up with a better statement than the one I did was a little hard), but it always pisses me off hearing some one say what Scott said. Yes, we are not required to buy a game, and we can just act like it doesn't exist, but how does that help anyone? If you have a genuine interest in playing a game, but can't stand or support the package that it is in, why should the decision that some one else made to wrap it in that package hinder you from enjoying the product? Sadly, when that happens, piracy is your only option. It makes both me and Scott sound like idiots because you only have the two options both of us are advocating; pointlessly deprive yourself of fun, or be a dirty rotten thief.

Keep in mind I support devs as much as I can. I am the guy that runs the Deals on Steam thread after all. As much as I try to highlight the deals there, there are plenty of people who just hate Steam, and never would purchase a game on there. It's just a shame for those who feel that Steam is a crap program, because they are depriving themselves of good deals and good games and are left with piracy as their only option to play some of the kewl indie games I've been buying and really enjoying. I guess devs need to offer some middle ground where gamers can get a game without a bad package so the thieving pirates have only one excuse: it was free.

However, people seem to neglect the fact that nobody is forcing you at gunpoint to buy Ubisoft's shit, and therefore if you don't like what Ubisoft does, you should just... not buy their shit! It's that simple!

Dude, that is such a crap argument when it comes to gamers loving good games.

Here lies the crux of the problem: the gaming community's lack of a backbone. If even half the people who ***** about DRM refused to buy OR pirate games with DRM in them, the game companies would be forced to sit up and take notice.

Arguing that gamers can't stop buying DRM-laden games because they love the games is sort of like arguing that drunks can't stop buying booze because it feels good to drink a lot, regardless of the fact that they'll get a hangover. There are plenty of DRM-free good games out there: go buy those.

Your museum analogy fails to take into account that the museum is a BUSINESS, and when people walk into the museum without paying, they are doing so ILLEGALLY. That's why when you get caught on the premises without a ticket, you get fined and thrown in jail. The illegality of the crime is not lessened by the good intentions of the perpetrators.

Man, you are so good at dropping end-all arguments I hate. Yeah, it's illegal, and it damn well should be, but that doesn't break the vicious cycle of people ripping off corporations ripping off people. Breaking the law is the only weapon Average Joe-Schmoe has to defend himself. As it is now, corporations are shitting all over us little guys by buying lawmakers and politicians, and thus the lines of what should be legal and illegal are getting blurred. I'm a realistic person: we have speed limits so that people don't go too fast and kill some one with their car, we have laws to punish people who run into a grocery store and grab things without paying, but we have the DMCA because corporations wanted to make sure that any other option we had was illegal when experiencing their products. They became a cartel by doing so, and it was made legal.

I don't have any good solutions to circumvent the media industry for being a dickbag, but at least when you were buying groceries, you could make a choice which store to go to, and which brand of food to enjoy. With media, you can't go watch a different Batman movie if you don't want to support Warner Bros, just as you can't go play another Assassin's Creed 2 if you don't want to support Ubisoft. The laws have been put in place to make sure you give them as much money as possible (which if fine if they deserve it, but they don't always). As it is, it's gotten so bad legally in the UK that you can be fined for listening to your radio so that others can hear it. Not because of noise disruption, but because it's called "public performance," and the others hearing the radio haven't paid their dues. It's shit like that that makes me say "fuck it if it's illegal," because it shouldn't have been a law to begin with. Now I find myself distrusting all laws made with corporate interests in mind, because they weren't written with me as a consumer in mind. So maybe my museum analogy doesn't account for what's legal, but it does account for what is fair for everyone.

Also, I'm not happy with your comparison of drunkards and gamers. Maybe we are junkies looking for our next fix, but it's possible to enjoy both games and alcohol without overdoing it. And not buying DRM games frequently means handing a drunkard water laced with ethanol: it may get the job done, but it isn't the fine quality liquor that they are looking for.

 

[Andy Chalk]

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I'm pretty sure the exorbitant pricetag of the bard's tale was a big reason it didn't sell very well.

I didn't think that was the case. After all, it spawned two direct sequels and a stand-alone Construction Set, an ad for which describes it as one of the best-selling series of all time. (In 1991, of course.)

And it's not really relevant anyway. Whether or not setting the price that high was a good business decision, the point is that it was a business decision because... it's business.

 

[scotth266]

It makes both me and Scott sound like idiots because you only have the two options both of us are advocating; pointlessly deprive yourself of fun, or be a dirty rotten thief.

Here's where you are wrong. I am not "pointlessly" depriving myself of fun by refusing to buy Ubisoft's stuff: I am demonstrating my will as a consumer. I am putting myself up to a higher standard, both by refusing to purchase DRM games, and by refusing to steal said games to enjoy them.

The ONLY instance where piracy is acceptable is when the game cannot be legitimately acquired, for any reason.

Oh, and breaking the law is not the only weapon Joe Schmoe has to defend himself: he has protests, rallies, freedom of speech... and it the case of the games industry's DRM problem, he has his boycott. Unfortunately, the gaming community seems to have all the willpower of a wet sponge [http://kotaku.com/5403286/what-modern-warfare-2-boycotters-are-playing] when it comes to being responsible consumers: but that's not fault of the game companies.

If you pirate an Ubisoft game, you are telling Ubisoft one thing: that they need to get tougher DRM next time to keep you from stealing the next game.