Hacker Group Claims Real Ubisoft DRM Crack

[Playbahnosh]

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.

Yeah, you are right, I have no interest in playing most of them, yet I'm still a video game journalist. Video games had been my life since I was big enough to use the keyboard and I was fortunate enough to get a job as a reviewer of them. I don't claim to be an expert, but I watched video games very closely during the years and I have every right to be pissed off. Maybe it's some "good 'ol days" and "get off my lawn" mentality in there, sure, but for what it's worth, I enjoy playing Duke Nukem 3D, Theme Hospital, Fahrenheit and Black&White more than MW2, GoW or Asscreed2. Sure, I might be sentimental, but I like games with at least a bit of heart. Games, that were made to entertain people not just making them pony up a wad of cash.

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.

I'm not saying video games were any less about making a living than providing fun entertainment, but those values have shifted drastically. Now, it's all about the money. At least your copy of The Bard's Tale won't try to assrape your video card, install a root kit, slap you in the face with ads, try to get you to buy virtual shit and DLCs every minute or phone home to ask the publisher if you may or may not play their game. Back in the day, you bought a game, you had a game, and it was a complete experience. And you know what? I would've paid 76 bucks for that game if I'd known what the future held, because it's worth it, unlike the mass produced, desensitized garbage today.

Yes, it is my opinion, and you can disagree with me, but I can't help it, this is the way I feel. Some years ago games were like gun shaped candies, colorful, badass and fun. Now, they are like crystal meth concocted in a lab, addictive, form- and colorless trade goods, that do provide 'entertainment' but make you die inside.

Maybe it's just me, but I rather kick ass and chew bubblegum than go and massacre a bunch of simulated civilians on an airport for some negative publicity. This is...not right...not right at all...

 

[z3rostr1fe]

Ubisoft New DRM == FAIL!

Really, if it's software, anyone can do anything to it! This DRM shit should stop now, as it is futile!

 

[Alar]

I don't agree with cracking open games, but I really wish game companies would go back to the LAN thought process. Remember those LAN parties you used to have with your friends? Hell, even just one guy bringing an extra console or PC over and firing it up for a night of awesome gaming and laughs? Yeah, those are going to be gone unless something happens. And personally, I wish cracking didn't have to be the solution here.

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

While I don't support piracy, I support this. It simply does not aid piracy, and allows legitimate users to play their copy properly. The crack helps the resell market as it lets people play used games.

One thing Ubisoft does not take into account- the internet is finicky. It does not always work. It you want to play the game you just paid $70 for, and you can't because your internet is down, that is simply unacceptable. Indeed, the reason why I usually play games on discs throughout the week is because my internet is down (on weekends I'll play them for their own sake).

Apparently using cracks to make using a legally bought copy of the game useable is illegal. My solution- I no longer buy from Ubisoft.

 

[Signa]

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.

To who though? No one is seeing your noble demonstration. No one that should care about your actions actually knows about them. I'm glad you are able to take the high road because many others choose not to, but it's a pointless act. You don't get to have fun for your choices, and Ubisoft never sees the money from you continuing to not purchase ACII. The only thing you get from this debacle is personal pride. Maybe that's enough for you, but personal pride doesn't put games on the table. Things are going to keep getting worse with or without you, and eventually you are either going to have to cave in or break your values if you want to play new games. They know this, and they are going to just keep on doing what they do. If I'm wrong, I'll apologize now, but Ubisoft already tried the no-DRM scheme with PoP, and now they have the worst DRM available.

I also don't believe that rallies and protests do shit. No one important ever listens to what their people want; whether it be corporations listening to their customers, or politicians listening to their voters. Average Joe-Schmoe is also thick as mud and will still vote for corrupt politicians that know how to win popularity contests with the public. How else did we get Bush in for two terms? Nothing is going to change short of an armed revolution, and that's never going to happen either.

 

[scotth266]

To who though? No one is seeing your noble demonstration. No one that should care about your actions actually knows about them. I'm glad you are able to take the high road because many others choose not to, but it's a pointless act. You don't get to have fun for your choices, and Ubisoft never sees the money from you continuing to not purchase ACII.

Sure, Ubisoft doesn't see my noble demonstration yet. That's because I'm one consumer in a mass.

If every consumer against DRM grew a backbone, then I would be one member of a mob.

I also don't believe that rallies and protests do shit. No one important ever listens to what their people want; whether it be corporations listening to their customers, or politicians listening to their voters.

The voice of the people is easily heard: they just need to get off their collective asses and take a more active interest in business and politics.

Look up how Nebraskans reacted to the news of the infamous "Corn-Husker Kickback", and you've got a modern-day political example of successful protest.

It's not that the people CAN'T do anything. It's that they choose not to.

 

[GoldenShadow]

You know how retarded this whole thing is. You need internet to download the pirated copy of Assassin's Creed 2, and you need internet to play the retail non-cracked game. Um so its not about the DRM, it about cheap skates who want something for nothing.

Sure I'm eager to play the game, but stealing is wrong. I like to be paid for the work I do and the same applies to game developers.

This whole reaction is stupid. You lock you house and vehicle so burglars won't be able to easily steal from you, right. What if the burglars go online and cry about locks making it too hard to use the car they bought. That doesn't happen.

Stealing the game doesn't teach anyone a lesson. It just makes you a criminal. If you don't like DRM, don't buy products with it.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

I'm currently at sequence 13 and have encountered no problems along the way. Fuck you, Ubisoft.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

Stealing the game doesn't teach anyone a lesson.

Technically, piracy isn't stealing. To quote "http://homepage.mac.com/simx/technonova/publications/the_difference_between_piracy_and_steal.html"

"See, when a pirate downloads a full version of a piece of software, the pirate isn't leeching bandwidth from the company's servers. The pirate has to download the software from some other person who has already purchased it. So bandwidth costs because of the pirate are zero for the company. Furthermore, the pirate isn't depriving any other potential customer of the game: he has not physically removed a copy of the software from a store shelf. There's no loss of sale for the company there, either. Finally, the software company paid absolutely nothing for the packaging or manufacturing of the product. Given the nature of computer software, it was downloaded from someone else's computer; so no manufacturing was needed."

So they're not losing profits, they're simply not gaining any.

EDIT: Double post, sorry.

 

[LightOfDarkness]

Pirates will inevitably find a way to crack games. It's only a matter of time, which is why you only make a DRM as an afterthought, or do a CD-Key system which is harder to crack (I THINK, don't quote me on that).

 

[mikecoulter]

Good on them. It's not up to Ubisoft how a customer uses its products. No internet? Sorry, no game.

 

[PsykoDragon]

YES! I bet on Skidrow & my friend bet on Razor! Now I just have to confirm this & when I do I'll get back to you guys.

True, this crack is a minor setback for pirates, but that fact that it has been done will mean that this DRM method is now obsolete & quickly crackable. The server emulator was smart, but didn't unlock the whole game, & not XP-compatible.

There is nothing created that cannot be uncreated, & thus there is nothing DRM'd that cannot be cracked.

& as stated earlier, crackers are like Robin Hoods to us living in poor countries.

EDIT: Oh, & Golden Shadow, there's a BIG difference between needing to keep an internet connection up to play a single-player game & downloading a crack. A crack is basically a patch, just like the patches you have to download to update games. But when everyone playing the game HAS to be connected to a single server (the Ubisoft server in this case), that's a single point of failure; If the server goes down, nobody can play. If I'm playing the cracked game, & my computer crashes, that doesn't stop anyone else from playing.

EDIT2: Yep, so far working perfectly.

 

[7ru7h]

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

Why is my Ubisoft employee Geiger counter ticking right now? You honestly want Ubisoft to have a reason to make more DRM like this. I have a slightly unstable internet and cannot play this at all. I also convinced 3 of my friends with similar internet problems to do not buy it.

Hmmm, you couldn't be a ubi employee as this would be self sabotage. Surely you would want your company to realize their mistake and please their customers?

this has nothing to do with what skid row did, they broke the law putting up a pirated drm free version of the game on the internet. and for this I wish, them and all there family great harm and a life of poverty and destitution.

Harsh much? This is one of those robber sues family kinda legal issues. Judging by this response, you clearly think that ubisoft are losing business. Err, wrong. If it convinces ubi not to make stupid DRM, their sales will be much higher for new games that are user friendly. From the responses on this thread, I would say that skid row actually convinced some people to buy AC2.

And I hope skid row is rewarded with a massive lawsuit that leaves them all homeless for there good work.

It's THEIR good work, not THERE good work. So they deserve homelessness for sending a message to ubisoft that could bring positive change and for giving many a reason to buy their good game. Sounds reasonable.

I love you skid row. You may have made a great turning point in Ubisoft's history. One which may once more make them a paragon of good ideas...

I think every person who works with Ubisoft's Drm dept, 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.

FTFY. Seriously though, its not the pirates who are making it hard for the industry, its stupid people who design "better" ways to protect content that only ends up hurting the legit customers, and the stupid people who support these decisions.

The thing that I find funny in a horrible sense, is the fact that no matter what I do in these situations, I end up hurting the industry. If I buy the game I want, I hurt the industry by promoting this sort of stupid behavior; if I pirate, I hurt the industry by taking a product without paying; and if I vote with my wallet and don't buy or pirate the game I hurt the industry by making them think that PC gaming is not a viable platform. Any way you look at it, I lose.

No if you dont buy and dont steal games with these drms you dislike, and do purchase games from companies who do not have these drm, you prove that people dont want these drm and will spend there money legally purchasing games that do not have it. You reward the parts of the industry that do not have these drm systems, and when other companies see this they will start to follow suit, less drm, more games for the pc, everyone wins.

Wait... how is it that my purchase of a game with Ubi's DRM doesn't hurt the industry by telling them that people will put up with most anything being shoved up their ass for less than 20 hours "entertainment" and at least that of frustration?

I get that I should spend my money on games without that (and a single look at my steam catalog would prove that I also subscribe to this thought), but the point still stands. No matter what I do in situations like the one with AssCreed2, it only serves to show the developer that the PC market isn't favorable, since it takes a real, working brain for publishers to realize that DRM hurts as bad or worse than piracy does.

 

[7ru7h]

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.

And if we were in bizzaro-world I would have to agree with you, but looking at the state of the courts lately, it doesn't fucking matter. The courts will almost always side with the content creators (just look at how they bend over backwards for the MAFIAA), even to the point where the flat out ignore anything in the DMCA that favors customers. Hell, I'm just surprised that the lobbyists haven't found a way to legislate the Free Use clause out yet, not that the courts ever seem to care about that little bit anyway...

 

[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.

And if we were in bizzaro-world I would have to agree with you, but looking at the state of the courts lately, it doesn't fucking matter. The courts will almost always side with the content creators (just look at how they bend over backwards for the MAFIAA), even to the point where the flat out ignore anything in the DMCA that favors customers. Hell, I'm just surprised that the lobbyists haven't found a way to legislate the Free Use clause out yet, not that the courts ever seem to care about that little bit anyway...

It's Fair Use, not free use, and the last time I checked, which, I'll admit, has been a while, the secondary liability cases where the court has sided with the content owners tended to have distribution angles involved in them that screwed it over for the consumer, or involved manufacture of hardware overrides, which isn't technically protected.

 

[Andy Chalk]

Maybe that's enough for you, but personal pride doesn't put games on the table.

That's just hilarious.

I also don't believe that rallies and protests do shit. No one important ever listens to what their people want; whether it be corporations listening to their customers, or politicians listening to their voters.

That would be hilarious too, if it wasn't so sad. Perhaps somebody should have told all those people in eastern Europe to just stay home and keep quiet, since, you know, rallies and protests won't accomplish anything.

Sometimes it really amazes me how far people will reach to justify the fact that they just don't wanna pay for their entertainment.

 

[Arcticflame]

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.

Criminals does not mean morally wrong.
Not that they are morally right. I'm just saying calling somone a criminal is not an insult.

And frankly, I don't follow your logic. You wish to support the company because the people who hacked it are bad people? The world is not black and white, there is no clear good or bay guy, and there is no reason to throw your lot in with any side, if both sides are trying to screw the other ones over, and the only one losing out are the valid consumers.

Support the consumer, don't buy ubisoft games, support the consumer, don't use pirated products. Throwing your lot in with ubisoft simply through sheer spite is ridiculous.

You know how retarded this whole thing is. You need internet to download the pirated copy of Assassin's Creed 2, and you need internet to play the retail non-cracked game. Um so its not about the DRM, it about cheap skates who want something for nothing.

Sure I'm eager to play the game, but stealing is wrong. I like to be paid for the work I do and the same applies to game developers.

This whole reaction is stupid. You lock you house and vehicle so burglars won't be able to easily steal from you, right. What if the burglars go online and cry about locks making it too hard to use the car they bought. That doesn't happen.

Stealing the game doesn't teach anyone a lesson. It just makes you a criminal. If you don't like DRM, don't buy products with it.

Except downloading a game via torrenting is easy, I could do it on a connection that has one minute of uptime every hour. However I wouldn't even be able to finish a level on Ubisofts DRM.

The reaction is not stupid, because your anology is wrong. A more correct one would be renting a flat, and your landlord putting a lock on the door so burglars couldnt get in. However you can only get it by first getting the key, so if the landlord is uncontactable you can't get into your own house.

And what is with people and thinking criminal equals bad person? Am I the only one that sees all the shit the government does and the ridiculous laws they put in place, and realises that nearly everyone in the country is a criminal in some way?

 

[7ru7h]

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.

And if we were in bizzaro-world I would have to agree with you, but looking at the state of the courts lately, it doesn't fucking matter. The courts will almost always side with the content creators (just look at how they bend over backwards for the MAFIAA), even to the point where the flat out ignore anything in the DMCA that favors customers. Hell, I'm just surprised that the lobbyists haven't found a way to legislate the Free Use clause out yet, not that the courts ever seem to care about that little bit anyway...

It's Fair Use, not free use, and the last time I checked, which, I'll admit, has been a while, the secondary liability cases where the court has sided with the content owners tended to have distribution angles involved in them that screwed it over for the consumer, or involved manufacture of hardware overrides, which isn't technically protected.

Free use? I said Fair -*looks at previous post*-...damnit. I really must have been exhausted yesterday.

Anyway, I see what you are saying, but it doesn't make the courts any less stupid. How does it make any sense for a video to be taken down to "protect" the original content, when they are doing absolutely no harm, an actually promoting it? Lets use a recent example, and go with the Hitler meltdown parody videos from Downfall: In this example, a whole group of videos that parody a movie all the while getting people interested in the movie it is from and making people want to go out and watch it. Now, if you were the content company (or to be more accurate, the publishing/distribution company, since the original creators rarely have a say in how the bit they made is inflicted on the world) would you remove something that was helping your brand? Well, if you were functionally retarded like most of them tend to be, yes you would, since anyone anywhere using what you have the rights to for free is basically a free kick to the nuts in this day and age, but I digress. In a sane world, if someone was using your product for free, while not cashing in on it, and helping you cash in on it, there really is no reason to stop those people. But again, we live in bizarro world where customer's never actually own any of the media they buy, people can send DMCA Takedown letters for shit they don't even have the rights to, and it makes perfect sense to stab yourself in the foot when people are using your content for free.

/rant

Edit: This pretty much describes my rant

 

[Doomsday11]

Well done lad's I do love ubisoft and AC but the DRM is ridicules and(as show useless at preventing piracy)so well done ubisoft well done your the only games company I've heard of that managed to screw over its costumers so much that they thank pirates for cracking the game.

 

[Cynical skeptic]

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.

I'm aware most people on the internet have nothing resembling a clue what "integrity" means, but you can't denounce something without first hand experience and retain any quantity of it.

The industry cheerleader's "if you don't like it don't play it" routine is the most prolific logical fallacy on the internet. Only a complete **** would comment on the state of anything without first hand knowledge, but it takes a bigger **** to say "if you don't like your first hand experiences, do not seek to either affirm or contradict your perceptions by continuing to seek first hand experience."

Also, this thread in general is rather chock full of the bullshit notion that anyone who is anti-drm is pro-piracy. Which is, suffice to say, disappointing. Just because the cores of two issues are at odds with one another, does not mean there are only two possible positions.

Piracy, like any sort of crime, isn't going away. The entirety of civilization was built upon value by scarcity. Digital information completely defies this model. You can't ascribe value to something that can be copied infinitely unless you control the sole means of production, which no one entity can. But attempting to protect digital information with more digital information is attempting to build a prison out of pillows.

The only real solutions to piracy are to either provide something tangible people want (as even the most devout pirate will be tempted to buy if they feel left out), or attack the means of distribution. Take all the money blown on DRM development and modify a bittorrent client (as they're all open source) to save all data to $null (or something) and stick a couple thousand copies on a couple thousand virtual machines on some absurd corporate line (oc-57) with dynamic IP addresses and drain the bandwidth. If you make piracy even slightly more difficult or unreliable, droves of pirates will simply give up... The scene hates p2p anyway.

Sometimes it really amazes me how far people will reach to justify the fact that they just don't wanna pay for their entertainment.

It really amazes me how far people will reach to justify happiness as a commodity.