The gawd-almighty merged DRM in Silent Hunter V thread

[Lanzfeld]

I have a question.

I have just purchased my 100th compter. Can I play SHV on ALL of them?

[Arrakis]

Couldn't the application of DRM be decided upon the "multiplayer value" of a game?

SH5 is mostly a single player game which offers the greatest depth (joke apart...) when this player plays the content of the new dynamic campaign installed from a CD-rom...
Since the beginning of the serie SH, multiplayer function is quite poor if I judge by the comments I came across in the forum.

According to me, the real interest of online registration would be the perspective of using the multiplayer perspectives offered by the game : there would always be a bunch of online people on Ubi servers to launch a campaign or battle.

The DRM as it is for now, presents more potential problems than real advantages. My PC is perfectly able to successfully save my current campaign files without the help of Ubi servers. I don't like the idea of having Internet reliability as a sword of Damocles while on cruise, and wondering if the game is about to pause, the time to retrieve the signal....It would be like watching a streaming video waiting for loading times.

Maybe will Ubi adopt the DRM only for certain titles and not for SH....at least I hope.

Look, I know i've had my beef with middle managers in here before, especially those that make decisions at UBI....but i've realised the error of my ways. Now all I want to do is meet the guys who made the DRM decision and shake their hands....what a great bunch of guys! It just makes me feel so silly and stupid for ever doubting their abilities.

Well done UBI

[trenken]

Another nice thing about DRM is it will allow them to seemlessly integrate multiplayer modes, or maybe even some open world mode, sort of like a sub sim MMO, which ive seen many people talk about here.

DRM doesnt mean that you dont own the game. That's ridiculous. Of course you own it. You've got a disc, the game is running on your machine, only thing that you wont have personally is your save game, and for the last 3 years ive played games that use DRM, Ive been a big fan of that.

Ive got a custom built machine that took a dump on me during my MMO playing days. Had it not been for DRM I would have lost roughly 1600 hours of playing, working hard for rare items, etc... I cant even fathom how bad that would have stung to lose all that.

[Steeltrap]

Originally Posted by trenken

Ive got a custom built machine that took a dump on me during my MMO playing days. Had it not been for DRM I would have lost roughly 1600 hours of playing, working hard for rare items, etc... I cant even fathom how bad that would have stung to lose all that.

Entirely sensible view when playing a MMO.

But a SINGLE PLAYER game?

If we apply your example to a single player environment, why in god's name would I want to be connected to the internet to save a game? How much time/effort do I lose if it dumps on me in the middle of a convoy attack? Does it save 'real time' so I can load at exactly the point I was when it dumped? That's before you consider the fact that save games in SH3 and 4 (I think 4, but definitely 3) had a lot of known issues.

Then consider Ubi's record with server access/stability.

I have no issue with Steam activation, for example. I also have no trouble with the fact that some advantages stem from such online involvement, such as digital d/l to retrieve a game after a hard drive crash etc, plus simpler patching.

Indeed, Steam has the attraction of allowing me to use 1 account/password for a variety of games. A huge problem in most workplaces is the multiplicity of systems and passwords people doing almost any job need to have. The resources spent per annum on tasks such as password re-sets is staggering (in my current role I have access to such info in a well known company here in Aus). Now they want me to do the same at home for games? Some on Steam, others on Ubi, others WindowsLive (which is crap)?? NO WAY

What I will never accept is being told I have to be connected the entire time. I can see no justification for that at all.

[Navarre]

Originally Posted by bratkorv

Clearly the devs better look for another publisher then UBI if they want to survive this business.

They can't, the developers in Bucharest are not an independent company, they are employees of Ubisoft. Ubisoft is the developer and publisher in one person. The developers have the choice to terminate at Ubisoft and find a new job or do what the employer requires.

[BulSoldier]

The one reasonable thing they could have done is that if you want to be offline and play the game stick the disk in your cd/dvd rom if you want to have net meanwhile well you have to be connected.Thats seems a bit more reasonable.

[bratkorv]

Originally Posted by Arclight

Who cares, still a minority, right?

(obvious sarcasm, in case I need to point it out )

Sarcasm indeed.

The market for historical simulations, and particularity submarine simulations is a narrow one. If they ignore this community, it will be at their own peril.

We are not criminals so why would any of us want to "pay" to be treated as such? Now is the time to make a stand. If you do not, then what is next? Perhaps a DRM with a monthly fee or limited connection time / month? UBI is just another corporation and they are only interested in making you pay them as much as possible, as often as possible. They do not care about the developers and they do not care about you and your gaming experience.

Think about that for a second.

I will make a new threat when SH5 is out and confirm that I have no intention of buying it. Now is the time to make a stand. If nobody is up for the task, then why are we arguing about this in the first place?

[cuervo111]

It's obvious most of us don't like this DRM. Shouldn't we redact some kind of letter from the comunity to Ubi, explaining why we think it is a bad idea, why they will lost some customers, and how we think not using that kind of DRM will be actually good for their business?

Just a thought...

[Arclight]

The writing is on the wall, it has been for some time. There have been several public outcries in response to ridiculous limitations imposed by DRM. No, I don't think a letter would do any good. Ubi is aware of the fact people hate this kind of crap, but they decided to go ahead anyway. Heck, they took it to the next level.

1 thing left to do, and that is vote with your wallet. If you feel like sending a message, that's the only one that they are going to notice, apparently.

[Steeltrap]

Originally Posted by cuervo111

It's obvious most of us don't like this DRM. Shouldn't we redact some kind of letter from the comunity to Ubi, explaining why we think it is a bad idea, why they will lost some customers, and how we think not using that kind of DRM will be actually good for their business?

Just a thought...

Sadly it's a bit like telling someone that they'd find the view and atmosphere far more pleasant if they'd only take their head out of their arse.

Despite how blindingly obvious it is, there are none so blind as those who will not see.....

[bratkorv]

Originally Posted by Arclight

... vote with your wallet. If you feel like sending a message, that's the only one that they are going to notice, apparently.

Truth Be Told.

[johan_d]

UBI is wasting money on this! they better keep the money for their stockholders, since people who want to play SH5 will buy it and play it with or without DRM.
Hackers will remove the internet check, and those who use a prirated copy will play it, and never intend to buy it, so there is no money loss here.
Yes read it again..

Only if they make an unbreakable DRM system, and be honest, no such thing is possible, everything can be hacked, even the Pentagon, then they will get some extra buyers, but not much.. those who dont want to pay for it either get a hacked version or if that doesnt exist move on to something else and never buy it in the first place.

Its so simple.

There is one thing they can do, and that is FADE.. woven in the complete game so it cant be bypassed or taken out easily, it must be so complex that even hackers dont want to crack it because it takes to much time..

Ever been on gamecopyworld.com ? there you see no-cd versions for a wagon load of games.. all the protections failed. It wont be easy to protect it.

Maybe lower the price?

Anyhow, same discussion is on avsim.com, and noone knows a good solution.

[Garion]

Sigh.. being one of those people that live in the middle of nowhere with a dodgy internet connection SH5 will be a No Go or maybe a go... no go.. go. go... no go for me depending on my Internet provider...

Dont think I want to support this kind of DRM soo No Sale Ubi.

Ubi probably make most of their profits on console games, so if their games tank on the pc because of their DRM it will give them the excuse to drop further PC titles... or am I just being a conspirathy Theorist

Cheers

Garion

[trenken]

Originally Posted by Steeltrap

Entirely sensible view when playing a MMO.

But a SINGLE PLAYER game?

What im saying is I lost all my save data from SH3, CoD, and many other games, the only game that I didnt lost my save data from was the mmo, which was a DRM game.

I spent 100s of hours playing SH3, everything was lost. I do not like games that save to my HDD, hence why Im a fan of DRM. It saved my ass in guild wars. I dont know anyone that doesnt have a constant connection to the internet so that argument makes no sense to me. I built a new machine, installed the game again, right back to where I left off on the other machine. So much better than the way games used to be.

Only exceptions I think are people on dialup, which is still nuts to me, there's so few of them now that game dev's dont worry about them anymore, and thats how it should be, things need to keep moving forward. And people that use their laptops in hotels, and really, how many of them are playing SH on a laptop in a hotel room?