So Ubisoft thinks that changing your PC hardware is an act of piracy.
So the hardware site Guru3D was doing video card benchmark tests with the Ubisoft-published game Anno 2070. After three hardware changes, they found that the game told them that they had used up all of their activations. They eventually got their activation key unlocked permanently by developer BlueByte, but not before dealing with Ubisoft BS.
DRM Bug? Nope.
When contacting Ubisoft marketing here in the Netherlands, their reply goes like this: 'Sorry to disappoint you - the game is indeed restricted to 3 hardware changes and there simply is no way to bypass that. We also do not have 7 copies of the game for you'.
So apparently, a new, hidden, and draconian DRM scheme has been implemented in Ubisoft games isn't as bad as always-on DRM, but bad enough to where it prevents reviewers from playing the game.
24th October 2007
Why the hell do hardware changes matter...?
I can understand limited the amount of computers it can be installed on, but not this...
Pimp of FileFront.
30th January 2008
Looks like they've taken a leaf out of Windows XP's book. Wonderful. Ubisoft are absolute tards.
GF is my bext friend *hugs GF*
21st December 2006
Why do they keep digging their own grave? :facepalm:
Because they're French? :clueless:
No, because they're stupid.
Here's an update on the story: Ubisoft Blue Byte has loosened the DRM a tiny bit, allowing video card changes to be made without using up an activation.
Ubisoft says the activation-limiting DRM in Anno 2070 works exactly like it's supposed to, and has also changed it so now it works differently.
Ubisoft's latest DRM fiasco came to light last week when Guru3D discovered that swapping video cards in a PC, which it was doing as part of a video card performance roundup, triggered the Anno 2070 activation limit counter. With only three activations to play with, it meant that a PC upgrade or two could render the game useless without intervention from Ubi's customer support department.
It was a ridiculous misapplication of the system, but Ubisoft told Rock, Paper, Shotgun that the DRM was actually working exactly as it was intended. "While it's correct that copies of Anno include three activations and that changing hardware may trigger the need for reactivation, the vast majority of Anno customers never encounter this scenario," the company said "On the rare occasion when a customer does need additional activations, Ubisoft customer service is available to quickly resolve the situation, and we encourage those customers to contact us directly so that we can ensure they are able to continue to enjoy their game."
As RPS points out, the Anno 2070 DRM, called "Tages," doesn't offer the deactivation option that's common in similar system used by other companies. Instead, uninstalling the game leaves behind a config file that future installs will use to recognize the game as legit, which is fine as long as you don't reformat your PC, suffer a major drive crash or do anything else that results in the loss or corruption of data - or, of course, make any sort of significant upgrades to your rig.
Today, however, the team from Ubisoft Blue Byte, the studio that created the game, dropped a line to Guru3D saying that video cards have been removed from the DRM equation. "Just wanted to let you know that we now remove the graphics hardware from the hash used to identify the PC," it wrote. "That means everyone should now be able to switch the GFX as many times as he/she wants."
That's all very well and good, and props to Blue Byte for quickly correcting a pretty egregious flaw in the machinery, but let's be honest here. This isn't Ubisoft changing its ways, this is Ubisoft doing a little spot cleaning in reaction to another PR debacle. It's good news for Anno fans, but as far as Ubisoft's overall [and still terrible] DRM policies go, it doesn't mean a thing.
24th October 2007
This still doesn't turn me off of them. I'd rather have fun playing a game then bitch about companies. =p
The reason I bitch is because if people don't bitch, then the companies will run you over, and some companies like Ubisoft are running people over.
4th August 2006
Killer Kyle;5603581The reason I bitch is because if people don't bitch, then the companies will run you over, and some companies like Ubisoft are running people over.[/QUOTE] Ubisoft, Activision, EA. The "Big 3" offenders in this regard. Overpriced (90% of the time anyway) DLC, restrictive and draconian DRM measures.... Kyle's absolutely justified in his view, there can be no reasonable argument against it either. The worst kind imo, are when the publishers decide to use their own choice of DRM with even the Steam version of a game. The most annoying one for me, is the use of GFWL on games such as Arkham Asylum and Arkham City, and Fable3. You cannot play without a GFWL account at all. Others including the use of SecuRom and other third-party DRM software are also used on Steam versions of games. Battlefield3 has an annoying DRM, since it requires Origin and uses the Battlelog interface, a browser based system for launching the game. However, as the article linked to in above posts, Ubisoft manages to maintain its "lead" over other publishers when it comes to draconian and invasive DRM. [QUOTE=Schofield;5603197]This still doesn't turn me off of them. I'd rather have fun playing a game then bitch about companies. =p
Nor does Origin's controversial terms of service turn me off using it, though I can understand why a lot of people don't like it/hate it.