Quoting: MajorLunaC

Quoting: godlikeYes we want Ubisoft's support because they are making really good games. DRM no DRM who gives a fudge about this dispute? I just want to have a choice. And if someone doesn't like DRM he can always avoid clicking "buy"... that simple.

That's just it: They're denying choices. In Japan, they already have DRMs that only allow you to play a movie that you BUY (NOT RENT; BUY) only a set number of times on ONLY a single DVD/Blueray player before you can't play the disk anymore, in some cases even "self-destructing" (no boom, just it wont play). Games there have very similar DRMs (like only 1 computer/console). So if anything happens to the player (like X-Box, X-Box 360 often broke), you basically lose ALL your games instantly, no refund

Do you have a link to back all that up? I find this fairly frightening.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Half-Shot

Quoting: FutureSuture

Quoting: MetallinatusI'm not sure I understand the issue here.... since when make services that you can't get pirating is a bad thing?
I mean, it is bad for pirates, but why is it an "evil" thing?

Look up all the recent controversies surrounding Ubisoft and read the comments by users as well. A company like that displays a high probability that these "services" would have worked just as well offline, but Ubisoft sees it fit to force you to be online for them now. Kind of like Anno 2070 or Diablo 3.

And it's not just DRM. Watchdogs preformance and graphics were deliberately hindered which was found out recently.

Precisely, Half-Shot, you rad lad. This corporate sugarcoating is sickening, but a throng of gullible customers will surely fall for it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: pbI'm pretty sure Steam knows it if you make the purchase through the Linux client or through a browser on Linux. They will also know when you play the game on Linux. So the stats should be alright. The problem is when one developer makes the original game and another one makes the port, as was the case with Civ V and well explained by Aspyr in the forums.

Nope. According to icculus, what is counted is what platform you play the game the most on in the first week after purchase. Buying a game that does not yet have a Linux client therefore doesn't register as a sale for Linux and doesn't make sense anyway since you cannot play the game.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: MetallinatusI'm not sure I understand the issue here.... since when make services that you can't get pirating is a bad thing?
I mean, it is bad for pirates, but why is it an "evil" thing?

Look up all the recent controversies surrounding Ubisoft and read the comments by users as well. A company like that displays a high probability that these "services" would have worked just as well offline, but Ubisoft sees it fit to force you to be online for them now. Kind of like Anno 2070 or Diablo 3.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: BillNyeTheBlackGuy

Quoting: FutureSuture

Quoting: BillNyeTheBlackGuy

QuoteAhhh, what Ubisoft really means is that current DRM is failing, so new DRM needs to be brought in to fix this. Got it. To my knowledge, Ubisoft does not yet have a presence on Linux, but with Windows gamers constantly getting shafted, do Linux gamers want such a company to join the fray?

I must be reading somebody radically different, because I'm pretty sure what they said doesn't equal DRM. Services could be anything, from achievements to free roaming multiplayer.

Check the source on which this editorial is based.

Considering that I read that article before seeing the GOL article, I still stand by what I said.

Knowing Ubisoft, these services will likely require one to be online for the most menial of tasks, but that's just going by probability. Ubisoft could be doing a complete turnaround i.e. the company may have actually learned a thing or two.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: PKMpl

Quoting: FutureSuture

Quoting: PKMplOf course we want the support of one the biggest publishers and developers, why would anyone even hesitate?

Windows gamers don't seem to like getting shafted, hence the huge controversy surrounding Ubisoft at the moment (the company loves to shoot itself in the foot) so why should Linux gamers?

People on the internet always complain, yet their games keep selling millions. There obviously is a demand.

That's the sad part, yes. People love to throw a tantrum after getting burned, not learn a thing, and then get burned again which will conjure another tantrum. Windows gamers are throwing tantrums left and right about Ubisoft and yet Linux gamers are pleading to be afforded the same opportunities as Windows gamers with regard to Ubisoft.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: BillNyeTheBlackGuy

QuoteAhhh, what Ubisoft really means is that current DRM is failing, so new DRM needs to be brought in to fix this. Got it. To my knowledge, Ubisoft does not yet have a presence on Linux, but with Windows gamers constantly getting shafted, do Linux gamers want such a company to join the fray?

I must be reading somebody radically different, because I'm pretty sure what they said doesn't equal DRM. Services could be anything, from achievements to free roaming multiplayer.

Check the source on which this editorial is based.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Imants

Quoting: liamdaweI picked up Ghost Recon Future Soldier on PS3 second hand recently for a bit of fun with my friend online, but nope that's another £7 to play online because of their online pass system.

£7 to play online on a two year old game.

I never agree that second hand buyers need to pay again to play online, why should they? Ubisoft got their money on the first purchase.

They are not a nice company to deal with.

You got burn and I understand your distrust. I bought from them heroes, settlers and anno series and had a lot of fun playing them. So yes I would like to have these games in future fore Linux.

There was a huge controversy around Anno 2070's always need to be online, even when just playing singleplayer, right? The game was quite broken from what I read. Sounds perfectly logical to be online when playing singleplayer.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: PKMplOf course we want the support of one the biggest publishers and developers, why would anyone even hesitate?

Windows gamers don't seem to like getting shafted, hence the huge controversy surrounding Ubisoft at the moment (the company loves to shoot itself in the foot) so why should Linux gamers?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: godlikeYes we want Ubisoft's support because they are making really good games. DRM no DRM who gives a fudge about this dispute? I just want to have a choice. And if someone doesn't like DRM he can always avoid clicking "buy"... that simple.

A fudge load of people give a flying fudge about this fudging dispute. Just traverse the internet and you'll see. Ubisoft's DRM is a special kind of bad and its rich history of controversy surrounding its software justifies the question rather well. We are most certainly not talking about Valve and Steam here. Ubisoft and Uplay is different. As commentators elsewhere have said, if the vast majority ignoring these things doesn't mobilize, nothing will change.

View this comment - View article - View full comments