4 ms·

Ubisoft delays server shutdowns, prevents purchased DLC from going away

36 points by isaacfrond 4y ago

causality0 4y ago
Products which rely on external services should be required to carry a expiration date, aka a guaranteed services date.
- teawrecks 4y ago
  That seems like a requirement that would favor the companies. I think the UniSofts out there would gladly normalize expiration dates if they could. I would prefer a requirement that, if the external services are taken offline, either the services must be made available to users to run themselves, or a patch must be released which makes the game no longer dependent on external services.
  - causality0 4y ago
    It would create competition. Are you going to buy the smart thermostat with a five year expiration or a ten year?
    - olodus 4y ago
      You would have to make it very clear that there is a possibility for liability or for the customer to sue if that expiration date is decreased.
  - jacooper 4y ago
    I think it would make it clearer to just ban calling it "buying" and force marketplaces to call it rent/license for x years.
  - jrootabega 4y ago
    I could see that. I would also HOPE that it might make people realize what they're buying. Then again, plenty(most?) people already happily defend publishers with the "I got x hours per $ from this game; I will gladly pay $y per year to keep playing it" meme, so it would probably be unremarkable to them.
- LinuxBender 4y ago
  I would like one additional option. When a game's servers are deprecated, the source code to host the server should be released in advance using a license that permits hosting the server for public or private use.
andyjohnson0 4y ago
I wonder if there is a business opportunity here: operating licence servers for legacy games. It would obviously require the approval of the game publisher, and some kind of subscription-based business model. I have no idea if that would work, but I suspect that there is a fair-sized subset of the gamer community that would be prepared to pay a small recurring fee to keep a much loved game alive. Thoughts?
- zulban 4y ago
  Nope. Game companies want to end those games so they can sell the same engine or mechanics but repackaged by an army of asset artists.
  - dawnerd 4y ago
    And sell an eventual remaster.
  - andyjohnson0 4y ago
    I'm sure you're right - its hard to see any significant upside for the original publisher. I'm not a gamer myself and it was just an idle thought.
- robotnikman 4y ago
  Doubt it. Steam offers this service to game developers for free[1], and some older games have switched over to them successfully after their old servers shut down (Company of Heroes is one example I can think of off the top of my head). [1]- (paid for probably by the usual cut they take from selling games through their service)
- wongarsu 4y ago
  GOG's original business model was basically selling legacy games with copy protection patched out and added patches for compatibility and localization. In the beginning CD Project/GOG did that through reverse engineering, so for publishers it was free revenue for old projects.
- smashed 4y ago
speeder 4y ago
I wonder if the updated Anno 2070 will remove their silly online restriction. I am still waiting that to play that game. For those that don't know, in Anno 2070 there are some single-player features that can't be used unless you are online, for example newgame-plus style item transfer. This "feature" is obviously some hamfisted DRM on top of the realm DRM the game already has (in fact some versions has two different DRM on top of each other, and some players can't play because they deadlock). If Ubisoft removes DRM from Anno 2070, I will then buy and play it. I refuse to touch it until then, even borrowed from a friend, I just refuse to play a game that does this (another one is Diablo III, never played it, and I won't play until it becomes accessible 100% offline when in single-player). But I won't hold my breath waiting, currently it feels that waiting Ubisoft to ditch DRM is like waiting gravity to fall upwards, considering instead that they add DRM to games that had none before (Anno 1404 for example)
- detritus 4y ago
  I can't remember what exactly the problem was, but Anno 2070 was the very last Ubisoft game I ever bought, because I bought it through Steam and then there was 'Some Stupid Problem' relating to either DRM or their trying to force the use of their own Steam-a-like too, and I never actually got to play the game. I don't buy that many games any more, but I certainly haven't bought a single thing from Ubisoft in over a decade now, because of that. And to think how much I loved them back in the 16-bit days for the stuff they put out on Amiga... . EA were beloved too, strangely.
  - Macha 4y ago
    Yeah, Ubisoft Game Launcher (as it was then, later uplay and now ubisoft connect) barely worked in those days and I remember my disc based copy of Anno 2070 and my steam copy of AC2: Revelations installed conflicting versions which could only launch one or the other so I had to keep swapping the folder in AppData
    - speeder 4y ago
      This issue still exists, on the comments section of Anno 2070 official site post announcing the update for the servers, people are complaining of this issue still.

36 points by isaacfrond 4y ago

causality0 4y ago

Products which rely on external services should be required to carry a expiration date, aka a guaranteed services date.

teawrecks 4y ago
That seems like a requirement that would favor the companies. I think the UniSofts out there would gladly normalize expiration dates if they could. I would prefer a requirement that, if the external services are taken offline, either the services must be made available to users to run themselves, or a patch must be released which makes the game no longer dependent on external services.
- causality0 4y ago
  It would create competition. Are you going to buy the smart thermostat with a five year expiration or a ten year?
  - olodus 4y ago
    You would have to make it very clear that there is a possibility for liability or for the customer to sue if that expiration date is decreased.
- jacooper 4y ago
  I think it would make it clearer to just ban calling it "buying" and force marketplaces to call it rent/license for x years.
- jrootabega 4y ago
  I could see that. I would also HOPE that it might make people realize what they're buying. Then again, plenty(most?) people already happily defend publishers with the "I got x hours per $ from this game; I will gladly pay $y per year to keep playing it" meme, so it would probably be unremarkable to them.
LinuxBender 4y ago
I would like one additional option. When a game's servers are deprecated, the source code to host the server should be released in advance using a license that permits hosting the server for public or private use.

andyjohnson0 4y ago

I wonder if there is a business opportunity here: operating licence servers for legacy games. It would obviously require the approval of the game publisher, and some kind of subscription-based business model. I have no idea if that would work, but I suspect that there is a fair-sized subset of the gamer community that would be prepared to pay a small recurring fee to keep a much loved game alive. Thoughts?

zulban 4y ago
Nope. Game companies want to end those games so they can sell the same engine or mechanics but repackaged by an army of asset artists.
- dawnerd 4y ago
  And sell an eventual remaster.
- andyjohnson0 4y ago
  I'm sure you're right - its hard to see any significant upside for the original publisher. I'm not a gamer myself and it was just an idle thought.
robotnikman 4y ago
Doubt it. Steam offers this service to game developers for free[1], and some older games have switched over to them successfully after their old servers shut down (Company of Heroes is one example I can think of off the top of my head). [1]- (paid for probably by the usual cut they take from selling games through their service)
wongarsu 4y ago
GOG's original business model was basically selling legacy games with copy protection patched out and added patches for compatibility and localization. In the beginning CD Project/GOG did that through reverse engineering, so for publishers it was free revenue for old projects.
smashed 4y ago

speeder 4y ago

I wonder if the updated Anno 2070 will remove their silly online restriction. I am still waiting that to play that game. For those that don't know, in Anno 2070 there are some single-player features that can't be used unless you are online, for example newgame-plus style item transfer. This "feature" is obviously some hamfisted DRM on top of the realm DRM the game already has (in fact some versions has two different DRM on top of each other, and some players can't play because they deadlock). If Ubisoft removes DRM from Anno 2070, I will then buy and play it. I refuse to touch it until then, even borrowed from a friend, I just refuse to play a game that does this (another one is Diablo III, never played it, and I won't play until it becomes accessible 100% offline when in single-player). But I won't hold my breath waiting, currently it feels that waiting Ubisoft to ditch DRM is like waiting gravity to fall upwards, considering instead that they add DRM to games that had none before (Anno 1404 for example)

detritus 4y ago
I can't remember what exactly the problem was, but Anno 2070 was the very last Ubisoft game I ever bought, because I bought it through Steam and then there was 'Some Stupid Problem' relating to either DRM or their trying to force the use of their own Steam-a-like too, and I never actually got to play the game. I don't buy that many games any more, but I certainly haven't bought a single thing from Ubisoft in over a decade now, because of that. And to think how much I loved them back in the 16-bit days for the stuff they put out on Amiga... . EA were beloved too, strangely.
- Macha 4y ago
  Yeah, Ubisoft Game Launcher (as it was then, later uplay and now ubisoft connect) barely worked in those days and I remember my disc based copy of Anno 2070 and my steam copy of AC2: Revelations installed conflicting versions which could only launch one or the other so I had to keep swapping the folder in AppData
  - speeder 4y ago
    This issue still exists, on the comments section of Anno 2070 official site post announcing the update for the servers, people are complaining of this issue still.