Yes, it's now more hassle to own a legitimate copy than a pirate version. I don't subscribe to the Ubisoft mantra, just answering the question as to what Ubisoft say are the advantages.

You can save games online NOW. There are services to do this, or you could simply target a network directory for save games, right?

I can install SH4 on any PC that I put the disk in, but only 1 at a time.

I'm not seeing any advantage.

I would seriously NEVER consider buying a game with a DRM like this. Seriously. What's going to happen if 6-7 years from now, or even 10 years from now, I decide to crack open my Silent Hunter 5 to have another go. Will the required server and service that I need to connect to still be around or am I screwed when they change or remove their servers in the future ?

I can't tell you how many games I have that are older that have that "Click here to automaticly update" button, but can't update because the company changed or removed their servers and some of these games are only 5-6 years old.

I guess the impact would likely be less than my imagination wants to think, but has releasing bogus pirate copies (either by a dev company itself or "counterpirates") ever worked? IIRC there were a few games released fairly recently which had built in limitations if they were pirated-I guess the warez types would just circle the wagons and "everybody" would know which sites had copies that worked (and which didn't), but if I was more technically minded I'd almost be inclined to throw together some code which subtly porks gameplay in a bunch of weird ways, and try to disseminate it anywhere I could-eventually if taken to the logical extreme nobody would ever know which copies were the good ones and which ones were the bad. [Note to Neal & co. I'm just indulding in idle speculation here understand]

The best part of this is that the resulting "bugs" would immediately indicate who was using the warez, as they would be coming on a subsim message board and complaining that the sun never moved in the sky or that his torpedoes only traveled at 5 knots (and hence he could never hit anything), or something. Scarlet Letter and all that.

They already tried something similar with a game (forget which one), it would crash, somewhere half way through, if it wasn't a legal copy. What happened? Well it totally backfired on the company, people started to complain about the crashes and the game got a reputation as 'unstable'. :lol:

It's been done in more then one game, some more successful then others.

I still remember players getting laughed (and booted) off the server in the original Op Flashpoint for asking "what does FADE mean?" :har:

Smart move admitting that, right after a moderator and the owner of this site, talked about tying pirates to a pole and shooting them. :roll:

He's already been keelhauled lad.. look away.. :yep:

I'm projecting my hatred of DRM, from Ubi to dead bloated pirate bodies. I might even poke him with a stick later. :D

Come to think of it, I wouldn't like that you all think I am a badly discriminating guy :nope:

So I correct my initial post: You don't really need to shoot the pirates.

You can hang them, behead them, electrocute, poison, drown, or impale. That's it, I think nobody is discriminated any longer :smug:

Those advantages are obviously bulls*it since I play only singleplayer and I already can install SH3 and IV on different PC's.

The real reasons are they want more control on players, modding, patching and eventually sell you more u-boat types and war years.

I editted my post, as people keep quoting it... I don't think the stated 'advantages' are real advantages at all. I was just answering the question of 'What did Ubisoft say were the advantages'. I won't be doing that again!

Its all about war....
 

You people don't get Ubisoft. They are simply getting in with the times.

We have :

• The war on drugs
• The war on terrorism
• The war on piracy (the real one on the high seas)
• The war on climate change
• The war on evolution

and now courtesy of Ubisoft the latest

• The war on your paying clients

:D

Certainly if it was an honest feature then it would be an option to save online or save offline. It's not optional because it's not customer service it's customer screwus. Also the Trojan Horse needed at least some very tiny surface appeal. Can hardly sell poison to people if you don't at least tell them it tastes good.

You're very right, circumventing protection to access your owned product is not piracy. Similarly you can't get arrested for breaking into your own house :) If the DMCA of 2001 is interpreted harshly it's illegal but would be named a violation, not piracy.

Operation Flashpoint and the copy protection was called FADE. A lot of real bugs were pananoidly thought to be FADE while proper FADE effects were thought to be bugs. A clever but misguided system.

Just to clarify: For me a pirate is just someone who STEALS, i.e. gets the product and uses it without having paid for it. No difference for me between the guy who downloads a cracked game or who goes into a shop and sneaks away with one under his jacket.

Using cracks on legitimatelly bought copies is just a EULA infrigement, but not piracy. And of course, it tends to promote and make it easy for pirates to obtain the mans to get illegal copies of software, but is not piracy itself.

In any case, you guys should know that f.e. here in Spain (Dunno about other countries) paragraph 270.3 of our criminal code considers delictive simply to posses, and of course create and spread programs or hardware that are specifically destined to eliminate the protection set by copyright holders in their works. I.e. creating or even posessing a game crack in Spain is not just illegal, but also a criminal offence.