Ubisoft ease DRM restrictions
 

http://www.reghardware.com/2011/01/0...ft_drm_checks/

Has this affected the Silent Hunter series at all?

Well, it certainly hasn't affected Silent Hunter 3. :D


SH5 was the only version to have this.

There is a thread about it in the SH5 forum.

Haha, good comment, Steve :D


If true, it's a move in the right direction.
However, from all accounts, the game is still unplayable out of the box. I have never been interested in purchasing train wrecks.

I wish there were a way to protect software without turning honest gamers away.

Intellectual rights is a complicated issue when those properties can be so easily compromised and distributed across the net. Just how does one protect their software from theft without jilting some of their customers? Ubi gave it a shot with their connection requirements and ticked some people off in the process.

Looking back at things like Starforce... or the hassle of looking up a certain word in a certain paragraph on a certain page... this cycle has been running for a long time. There has always some element out there that wants to rip off the craftsmen, and there has always been a complication of some sort to deal with that. Human nature prevails. :O:

I don't want to speculate on whether Ubi will lift their requirements for SH5. But, the servers will have to be re-appropriated for something else at some point down the road... so, most likely we will see an end to SH5's internet ball and chain. When? is anybody's guess. :haha:







Like I have a computer that will run the damn thing... pssshh! :shifty:

An interesting angle from the future of sims article really surprised me, though it has the same appeal as hiding in plain sight - don't put any DRM on the software. While there is a large number out there who's only goat is to get free software, by removing the restrictions it kills the appeal to many crackers. Why bother screwing around with a game/software that has no defense, there's no challenge or reputation to be gained from doing anything to it.

It is quite bold and risky to publish your software in that manner; though it shows that the publisher has faith in the consumer that they will do the right thing - in that company's case it has worked very well. The harder you make it to break the software the more it will attract people to try it.

Had SH5 been flawless, all major bugs fixed it was doomed from the start. Despite how cool it looked I wasn't about to pay for something that I can't play at my own leisure, whenever and wherever I want. This step is one in the right direction, the major damage has already been done and can't be undone even if they completely lifted the internet restrictions.

There is. Use non-trivial, non-intrusive copy protection, (I hate the Orwellian phrase "DRM") and stop worrying about the people who hack copy protection and download :arrgh!: software for kicks. They aren't your customers. Your customers are the people who have a relationship with your company and want to support your product. It's up to the publishers to cultivate that relationship and grow their fan base. That's the best strategy for protecting their profits. Focusing on the customer you never had and are never likely to gain to the detriment of the customer you're hoping to keep is a self-defeating strategy in the long run.

Nice one http://www.psionguild.org/forums/ima...s/thumbsup.gif

Treat your customers how you would like to be treated tends to generate positive results. Provide a quality product and it will speak for itself, people will be very amicable for paying for future upgrades/add-ons, real customers support the company/developers in hopes that they will make more good products.

Ignoring all business/corporate users, I wonder how many people have ever paid for WinZip? Compare it with 7-zip (much better program anyways) which is free I would imagine that 7-zip gets much more in donations than WinZip does for licenses.

Oh, very good points. :haha: Honest people don't like being treated like crooks; that's for sure. :yep:

I've read that there are some indie companies that are experimenting with selling their games without copy protection. The hope is that their sales will actually increase. One developer even went so far as to cut prices a bit to reach more of his audience. I guess it makes sense that the greater the audience, the greater the profits in the long run. Why is it that some of the larger companies haven't taken such risks, when they already put so much on the line as it is for a quick buck?


Works great for small local businesses. I might be wrong on this, but large corporations are just too big to see their customers as being the bottom line. Brings another thought to my mind: small indie developers have to be Johnny-on-the-spot with support and patches because they cannot afford to lose customers. :hmmm: