PDA

View Full Version : Would you buy it for x dollars?


freeloader105
03-10-2010, 09:40 PM
I'm personally waiting for something like $10 (USD). Might take a year, but with so many titles (MW2, BF:BC2, Mass Effect 2, Mafia II, Dead Space 2, Crysis 2, Civilization 5, etc) the later the better.

How about the rest of you? Anyone else really not bothered so much by the whole DRM or $60 thing and just ready to wait until it becomes really cheap? Steam holiday sales are pretty epic, in case you forgot.

Mark_VI
03-10-2010, 09:42 PM
I'd pay $5. It feels like a rental, so I'd pay rental price.

jacobignagni
03-10-2010, 09:49 PM
I'd pay $5. It feels like a rental, so I'd pay rental price.


I payed full price. After playin the first, that one feels like a rental. This one has a little more depth. Recommend you try it :) I wouldn't even pay for the first one haha.

Royas
03-10-2010, 09:50 PM
5 or 10 dollars, tops. Like Mark_VI said, it's a rental, and that's a fair price for a rental.

InternetsUser
03-10-2010, 10:34 PM
$15-20 absolutely.

Would strongly consider it at $30 if it went on sale tomorrow.

Vincent
03-10-2010, 10:45 PM
If they remove the drm I would buy it for 70 bucks. I am being serious, I hate it so much.

Rishwin
03-10-2010, 10:52 PM
I'm personally waiting for something like $10 (USD). Might take a year, but with so many titles (MW2, BF:BC2, Mass Effect 2, Mafia II, Dead Space 2, Crysis 2, Civilization 5, etc) the later the better.

How about the rest of you? Anyone else really not bothered so much by the whole DRM or $60 thing and just ready to wait until it becomes really cheap? Steam holiday sales are pretty epic, in case you forgot.

It has nothing to do with the steam price, it has to do with the local price.

$60 for you seems lot. In Australia games retail for $100-$110 (about $90 USD), so we have absolutely no problem with paying $60. Console games cost the same too.

Why do so many people complain about the AC2 price? Do you see that many people complaining about thw MW2 price? In case it's different for you guys, it's listed as $90 USD for us. And that is STILL cheaper than retail.

impreza50
03-10-2010, 11:05 PM
yeah once there is a working crack for it.

freeloader105
03-11-2010, 12:03 AM
$60 for you seems lot. In Australia games retail for $100-$110 (about $90 USD), so we have absolutely no problem with paying $60. Console games cost the same too.

It's a lot to us because it's higher than usual. For you the usual is $100-110 USD :D.

I'm so happy I don't live in Australia, at least from a gamer's standpoint (internet situation included).

yeah once there is a working crack for it.

I don't know about that. This game goes a little beyond a simple online check. And if this does get cracked, Ubi always has the option of OnLive-exclusive. I'm assuming everyone knows about OnLive by now..

DJ_Professor_K
03-11-2010, 12:42 AM
If the DRM isn't removed, 15$ max.

If the DRM is removed (or replaced), i pay the full price asap.

StingingVelvet
03-11-2010, 12:45 AM
I paid $42 thanks to amazon offering a preorder before knowing the price would be $60. Kind of feel bad about it, but not tooo bad, lol.

DarthWolf
03-11-2010, 01:16 AM
Personally I don't care about price. I'm able to buy console for one freaking game. It is not price tag that keeps me away from this game.

mriguy
03-11-2010, 01:22 AM
Well let's see...

This month I would have brought SH5, AC2 and R.U.S.E.
Ubisoft profit $160

This month I will not buy SH5, AC2 and R.U.S.E. because of the DRM
Ubisoft profit $0

Maybe, in the future I'll pick up the titles later for $5 - $10
Ubisoft profit $15 - $30

I hope this DRM is converting pirates to legitimate customers like Ubisoft believes, because it sure converted me into spending my money elsewhere. I have also become more appreciative (paying full retail) for titles that decide to just use Steam as the DRM.

StingingVelvet
03-11-2010, 01:56 AM
I have also become more appreciative (paying full retail) for titles that decide to just use Steam as the DRM.

Because Steam DRM is so consumer friendly...

Mr. Fabulous
03-11-2010, 02:17 AM
$60

Yes, Im serious.

mriguy
03-11-2010, 03:28 AM
Because Steam DRM is so consumer friendly...

Yes, I finD Steam DRM acceptable.

Steam (and Impulse) are DRMs that I accept. There is no need for a publisher to add additional layers.*

I knowingly make a lot of sacrifices buying through Steam. I expect publishers recognize this and not add additional DRM on top of it.


* Of course GOG is always good for older titles.

eydeeb
03-11-2010, 03:40 AM
Yes, I finD Steam DRM acceptable.

Steam (and Impulse) are DRMs that I accept. There is no need for a publisher to add additional layers.*

I knowingly make a lot of sacrifices buying through Steam. I expect publishers recognize this and not add additional DRM on top of it.


* Of course GOG is always good for older titles.

The only thing you forget is that the Steam DRM is easily cracked, so easily that pirates could play MW2 online. It's the same for AvP if I'm not mistaken. The Ubisoft DRM is still holding against the pirates. This is the only thing that matters if we're talking about DRM.

Alienchild
03-11-2010, 03:48 AM
$50 if no DRM other then Steam.
$10 on a weekend deal with the DRM.

spyrochaete
03-11-2010, 04:14 AM
While this game has this DRM I would not buy this game for $1. I adored the first game had been looking forward to the sequel for ages, but I refuse to support Ubisoft while they maintain this DRM system.

Crysis, Far Cry 2, and other games I'd like to play have been on sale for less than $10 in recent times but due to the limited installation activations I refuse to buy those as well.

If this is the way Ubisoft plans to do business from now on then my business will be conducted with one of their competitors.

Rishwin
03-11-2010, 04:38 AM
While this game has this DRM I would not buy this game for $1. I adored the first game had been looking forward to the sequel for ages, but I refuse to support Ubisoft while they maintain this DRM system.

Crysis, Far Cry 2, and other games I'd like to play have been on sale for less than $10 in recent times but due to the limited installation activations I refuse to buy those as well.

If this is the way Ubisoft plans to do business from now on then my business will be conducted with one of their competitors.

Find me another form of DRM which has successfully stopped piracy? This has yet to be cracked, and if it's success is anything to go by, they will continue using it and other publishers may also follow.

Btw, don't list Steam as one, i've seen it easily cracked, which made ALL the games available AND download-able. You could even play them online without detection.

Zmidponk
03-11-2010, 04:57 AM
This is the thing - I am perfectly willing to actually pay a very high price for AC2, because it's a genuinely good game. $60? That's what, just under 40? Yes, I'd pay that. I'd even be willing to pay MORE than that - say, 50, simply because this game is so damn good.

With this DRM, though, I'm not willing to pay one single penny.

Oh, and Rishwin, the word you're missing is 'fully' - this has yet to be FULLY cracked.

Not only that, it has delayed a full crack appearing, yes - at the expense of customers leaving Ubisoft in droves in protest about it, partially because it makes it appear that Ubisoft don't really give a flying ♥♥♥♥ about the rights of its customers.

I wouldn't call that a success.

cristianesza
03-11-2010, 05:23 AM
I wouldn't pay $60 for a single player game, no matter how much replayability value it has, after a month or two you'll uninstall it and move on to other games, as opposed to multiplayer games where you can have a different experience every time you play and that keeps you comming back for months and months (or even years if it's a good MP game like the Battlefield series).

That said, I wouldn't pay more than $30 for AC2 single player, while if it had some MP component I'd gladly pay $50, but not more than that.

Then there's ♥♥♥♥ing DRM scheme, which wouldn't allow me to play the game because I have a crappy wi-fi and a 512k DSL, which are enough for most MP games but don't meet the "HIGH SPEED INTERNET CONNECTION" requirement in the AC2 store page.

DARKNIGHT
03-11-2010, 05:24 AM
with drm: 0
without drm: 0

I dont care if they patch out the drm now or in 10 years, ubisoft is on my banlist because of their own stupid actions, this means i will never ever be able to play future ubi games, but honestly i dont care anymore.

BDK
03-11-2010, 05:28 AM
I would have to get payed to put up with this garbage.

Rishwin
03-11-2010, 06:36 AM
I wouldn't pay $60 for a single player game, no matter how much replayability value it has, after a month or two you'll uninstall it and move on to other games, as opposed to multiplayer games where you can have a different experience every time you play and that keeps you comming back for months and months (or even years if it's a good MP game like the Battlefield series).

That said, I wouldn't pay more than $30 for AC2 single player, while if it had some MP component I'd gladly pay $50, but not more than that.

Then there's ♥♥♥♥ing DRM scheme, which wouldn't allow me to play the game because I have a crappy wi-fi and a 512k DSL, which are enough for most MP games but don't meet the "HIGH SPEED INTERNET CONNECTION" requirement in the AC2 store page.

The connection speed of the AC2 DRM is slightly lower than dialup. They say "high speed" because that equates to ADSL since it is always connected.

To test this theory, i used my ISP provided "backup dialup" and was able to play AC2 just fine. It was only for a few minutes mind you because dialup ties-up your phone line, but it worked flawlessly none the less.

Seekzorz
03-11-2010, 06:54 AM
With the DRM, Ubisoft would have to pay me to play it.

If removed, I might get it in a year, or two years, or until it's available at Good Old Games...

But then again, maybe at that time I might have forgotten about it alltogether.

Ciaos
03-11-2010, 07:06 AM
The only thing you forget is that the Steam DRM is easily cracked, so easily that pirates could play MW2 online. It's the same for AvP if I'm not mistaken. The Ubisoft DRM is still holding against the pirates. This is the only thing that matters if we're talking about DRM.

Only MW2, and not AvP. And that was patched. Its only because of that fail system of IWnet. Never hear about cracked people playing L4D/TF2 etc. legitimately ;).

At least this DRM doesn't install some dodgy stuff on your computer. If it comes at a severe knockdown price then why not.

cristianesza
03-11-2010, 07:07 AM
The connection speed of the AC2 DRM is slightly lower than dialup. They say "high speed" because that equates to ADSL since it is always connected.

To test this theory, i used my ISP provided "backup dialup" and was able to play AC2 just fine. It was only for a few minutes mind you because dialup ties-up your phone line, but it worked flawlessly none the less.

Thank you for this clarification! (+rep)

I've been Googling trying to figure out what is the bandwidth required for playing it, but couldn't find any certain response until now. I may buy this game at some point since that was the only thing that scared me about the DRM.

Rishwin
03-11-2010, 07:17 AM
Thank you for this clarification! (+rep)

I've been Googling trying to figure out what is the bandwidth required for playing it, but couldn't find any certain response until now. I may buy this game at some point since that was the only thing that scared me about the DRM.

You can calculate it for yourself if you want, but if you play AC2 for 24 hours non-stop, the DRM uses just under 2.5MB of bandwidth in total. This has been confirmed by Ubisoft themselves, and i from what I've seen, that's about spot-on.

They say "high speed" simply because they don't want people to play for hours on end on dial-up, forget they are still connected to the internet, and have their phone lines tied up the entire time. Having a family member die and you couldn't be notified due to playing AC2 is the last thing Ubisoft wants to be responsible for :P

nightside187
03-11-2010, 08:31 AM
I would not pay more then 29.99 right now, in 1 year i will pay 19.99 so they completly out for me at 59.99

Aceteam
03-11-2010, 08:38 AM
I paid 54 for it on Steam. And it was worth every cent.

spyrochaete
03-11-2010, 08:41 AM
Find me another form of DRM which has successfully stopped piracy? This has yet to be cracked, and if it's success is anything to go by, they will continue using it and other publishers may also follow.

Piracy is Ubisoft's problem, not the customer's problem. This DRM gets in the customers' way of enjoying the product and that's not something I'm going to reward them for imposing on me. There are a zillion other games out there with fewer restrictions. I will buy those instead.

Rishwin
03-11-2010, 08:47 AM
Piracy is Ubisoft's problem, not the customer's problem. This DRM gets in the customers' way of enjoying the product and that's not something I'm going to reward them for imposing on me. There are a zillion other games out there with fewer restrictions. I will buy those instead.

Theft is the stores problem, not my problem. The security guard they put to check your bags as you leave is getting in the way of me enjoying my shopping experience. You're right, i shouldn't shop there anymore, the security measures they impose on me makes me feel like a criminal.

It sounds stupid, doesn't it? Yet it is still a completely valid comparison to your statement.

Woutman
03-11-2010, 08:52 AM
I pay Ubisoft to entertain me with their games, which is exactly what they're doing with AC2. As long as the DRM doesn't detract from that enjoyment, which it in no way does, it doesn't factor into my choice of purchase. People should really learn to think rationally and stop jumping on every bandwagon that comes along.

And don't get me started on this price thing. I spend as much on a 6 hour night out as I do on a game that brings me 50+ hours of entertainment. I'd say that's a pretty good deal.

AnonymousX
03-11-2010, 09:40 AM
$15, deal.

exist887
03-11-2010, 10:25 AM
$60 obviously since I bought the game. Wish it was "regular" price at $50 but hey, this game is so far pretty amazing. Much better then the first. And thankfully, the DRM has not gave me any problems. If this game wasn't better then the first, then I'd be upset but so far I feel like I'm getting my money's worth.

StingingVelvet
03-11-2010, 10:41 AM
Yes, I finD Steam DRM acceptable.

Steam (and Impulse) are DRMs that I accept. There is no need for a publisher to add additional layers.*

Well, purchase it retail and you only get one layer.

And my point was more that rallying against DRM systems like this should include Steam because honestly they are not that different. Steam's offline mode is the only difference and it is rather iffy most of the time, plus that's a purely functional thing. On principle, they are exactly the same.

Vincent
03-11-2010, 10:44 AM
Because Steam DRM is so consumer friendly...

I have to agree they are smart to come up with this system, but I am pretty sure that it is new right now. Sooner or later it will be cracked.

spyrochaete
03-11-2010, 10:50 AM
Theft is the stores problem, not my problem. The security guard they put to check your bags as you leave is getting in the way of me enjoying my shopping experience. You're right, i shouldn't shop there anymore, the security measures they impose on me makes me feel like a criminal.

It sounds stupid, doesn't it? Yet it is still a completely valid comparison to your statement.

No, that's not a valid analogy because you missed the point.

I'm a consumer. I want to buy a product and have it work when it's convenient for me to use it. If the product cannot deliver that promise then there are hundreds of competing products that can. The manufacturer's business operations are none of my concern - all I want is a reliable product that will work when I need it to.

Here's a better analogy.

I want to complete an Ubisoft crossword puzzle. The only way I am permitted to do this is if an Ubisoft employee holds the book while I write in it. This employee may go on break any time without warning, at which point he pulls the book away, crumples it up, and throws it in the garbage. Whenever he decides to come back from break he brings me a fresh book and I have to start the crossword puzzle over again from the beginning.

Ciaos
03-11-2010, 10:54 AM
Theft is the stores problem, not my problem. The security guard they put to check your bags as you leave is getting in the way of me enjoying my shopping experience. You're right, i shouldn't shop there anymore, the security measures they impose on me makes me feel like a criminal.

It sounds stupid, doesn't it? Yet it is still a completely valid comparison to your statement.

There are acceptable forms of DRM, say Steam/Disc Check which would be the equivalent to say security tags.

Your analogy is incorrect anyway. Which store in the world imposes a bag/body search before you leave?

spyrochaete
03-11-2010, 10:56 AM
This is the thing - I am perfectly willing to actually pay a very high price for AC2, because it's a genuinely good game. $60? That's what, just under 40? Yes, I'd pay that. I'd even be willing to pay MORE than that - say, 50, simply because this game is so damn good.

With this DRM, though, I'm not willing to pay one single penny.

This is my feeling exactly. I have complete faith in Ubisoft as a developer, but as a publisher their terms are completely unacceptable.

Azure_One
03-11-2010, 11:19 AM
Find me another form of DRM which has successfully stopped piracy? This has yet to be cracked, and if it's success is anything to go by, they will continue using it and other publishers may also follow.

Btw, don't list Steam as one, i've seen it easily cracked, which made ALL the games available AND download-able. You could even play them online without detection.

StarForce. StarForce held out for far longer than this new system has been in use.

Considering how the Uplay DRM is already partially cracked, I guess we should go back to StarForce, since it was better at stopping piracy.

paratech2008
03-11-2010, 11:22 AM
$10, maybe $15.

MarkcusD
03-11-2010, 11:22 AM
It's essentially a rental so I'd pay about $5 for it.

spyrochaete
03-11-2010, 11:37 AM
It's essentially a rental so I'd pay about $5 for it.

FYI, Steam is a rental service. The EULA calls us "subscribers" not "owners". You don't own anything you pay for on Steam.

Woutman
03-11-2010, 12:02 PM
It's essentially a rental so I'd pay about $5 for it.

Every game is a rental. If you'd actually read some EULAs you'd know this.

Chapa9dj
03-11-2010, 12:52 PM
If the DRM remains: U$D20 and i think i'm being very generous.
If the DRM is removed: U$D50 or probably the full price.

Mark_VI
03-11-2010, 12:58 PM
Every game is a rental. If you'd actually read some EULAs you'd know this.

EULA's aren't written in stone. Just because the publisher says something doesn't necessarily make it legal. It's a very complicated legal issue and there haven't been any definitive high court rulings on it here in the US.

Rishwin
03-11-2010, 01:03 PM
EULA's aren't written in stone. Just because the publisher says something doesn't necessarily make it legal. It's a very complicated legal issue and there haven't been any definitive high court rulings on it here in the US.

If you click the box which says "yes, i agree" then yes, it is legal and yes it is set in stone. There is not a consumer on earth who owns a game, what you purchase is a copy of the game, and a license.

Please do not bring up the American court system, people have been sued for beating up someone who was robbing them.

Zmidponk
03-11-2010, 01:25 PM
If you click the box which says "yes, i agree" then yes, it is legal and yes it is set in stone. There is not a consumer on earth who owns a game, what you purchase is a copy of the game, and a license.

Please do not bring up the American court system, people have been sued for beating up someone who was robbing them.

Erm, your assertion is, essentially, that EULAs are legally binding contracts. That is a legal issue. How can we discuss legal issues without bringing courts into it?

In actual fact, there have been numerous decisions all reiterating the idea that consumer rights trump EULAs, stretching back to at least the early 90s.

In actual fact, many places hold that, whilst the EULA says that, law says different. As I pointed out elsewhere, when law and EULA disagree, law wins.

Rishwin
03-11-2010, 01:28 PM
Erm, your assertion is, essentially, that EULAs are legally binding contracts. That is a legal issue. How can we discuss legal issues without bringing courts into it?

In actual fact, there have been numerous decisions all reiterating the idea that consumer rights trump EULAs, stretching back to at least the early 90s.

In actual fact, many places hold that, whilst the EULA says that, law says different. As I pointed out elsewhere, when law and EULA disagree, law wins.

Time and time again, you throw words without actually SAYING anything. Yes, whatever it is you have just said we are all aware of. But it has said nothing against the point i just made.

Unless you can come up with an ACTUAL LAW which is being broken if steam follows suit with what is written in the EULA, your whole argument means nothing.

spyrochaete
03-11-2010, 01:29 PM
If you click the box which says "yes, i agree" then yes, it is legal and yes it is set in stone.

Not in the slightest. A toddler can click that button. A cat can click that button. No court in the world would agree with that statement, I'm afraid.

Rishwin
03-11-2010, 01:35 PM
Not in the slightest. A toddler can click that button. A cat can click that button. No court in the world would agree with that statement, I'm afraid.

I would hope not too many toddlers also have your steam login details and/or credit card details.

The EULA is there for a reason, if it really has no legal standing as you guys seem to think so, then it would not exist.

Zmidponk
03-11-2010, 02:04 PM
Time and time again, you throw words without actually SAYING anything. Yes, whatever it is you have just said we are all aware of. But it has said nothing against the point i just made.

Unless you can come up with an ACTUAL LAW which is being broken if steam follows suit with what is written in the EULA, your whole argument means nothing.

Well, applicable to any boxed game I have bought that ties into Steam (and arguably any game I have bought through Steam as well), the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. This states that, if any contract term causes a significant imbalance in the rights and obligations of the parties to the detriment of the consumer, it has to be individually negotiated during the sale. A term that says that I am, in fact, not buying the game at all would clearly be such a term.

Zmidponk
03-11-2010, 02:08 PM
I would hope not too many toddlers also have your steam login details and/or credit card details.

The EULA is there for a reason, if it really has no legal standing as you guys seem to think so, then it would not exist.

Wrong. It exists so that those who aren't really all that up on their legal rights are browbeaten into following it, and it's advantageous for the publishers and/or developers that they do so.

StingingVelvet
03-11-2010, 03:57 PM
It's essentially a rental so I'd pay about $5 for it.

So you never pay more than $5 for a Steam game?

In every way AC2 is a rental, so is every Steam game.

Saffire123
03-11-2010, 04:29 PM
I could do $15-20.

eyehate
03-11-2010, 04:43 PM
I don't like the recent jump in prices from 50 to 60, but I am willing to pay 50 for any well done PC game to support the community and ensure more are made. AC2 is one of those titles I could justify.

Jito463
03-11-2010, 05:19 PM
Theft is the stores problem, not my problem. The security guard they put to check your bags as you leave is getting in the way of me enjoying my shopping experience follows you home, watches you every moment while you use your product, and if the guard has to leave, you aren't allowed to use your new product until the guard comes back. You're right, i shouldn't shop there anymore, the security measures they impose on me makes me feel like a criminal.

It sounds stupid, doesn't it? Yet it is still a completely valid comparison to your statement.

There, I fixed it for you. That would be a more valid analogy.

And to add to this, theft is an entirely different issue than copyright infringement. Remember, piracy is NOT theft. While I do not condone piracy, I still feel the point needs to be made. Piracy of any digital product (whether it's movies, games, music, etc) is copyright infringement.

The term 'theft' only applies when dealing with a tangible product that cannot be duplicated.

Piracy with the intent of monetary gain is another story, but that's irrelevant to this discussion.

Woutman
03-11-2010, 05:32 PM
Because Steam DRM is so consumer friendly...

Don't try and stop the bandwagon.

tripph
03-11-2010, 10:28 PM
$20 is the most I would pay for a game with this kind of DRM, seems fair for an extended rental.

As for comparing steam games to rentals, it's not really the same because I'm able to play and save all my steam purchases just fine in offline mode.

Void(null)
03-11-2010, 10:33 PM
Not a single penny while it uses uplay.

I still haven't picked up Chronicles of Riddick: Assault on Dark Athana despite it being on sale for $5 or under multipul times, simply because it still uses Tages.

I am one of the few people for whom price really isn't the point or the concern, but the principal of the it all means everything.

StingingVelvet
03-11-2010, 10:38 PM
$20 is the most I would pay for a game with this kind of DRM, seems fair for an extended rental.

As for comparing steam games to rentals, it's not really the same because I'm able to play and save all my steam purchases just fine in offline mode.

What does offline have to do with it being a rental? When you say the DRM makes it a rental, I assume that is because it is account-based. Steam is also account-based. Or because access one day may be eliminated, which could also happen with Steam.

It being online all the time does not make it a rental and Steam being offline does not make it not a rental.

So if you call one a rental, call both a rental.

tripph
03-11-2010, 10:45 PM
What does offline have to do with it being a rental? When you say the DRM makes it a rental, I assume that is because it is account-based. Steam is also account-based. Or because access one day may be eliminated, which could also happen with Steam.

It being online all the time does not make it a rental and Steam being offline does not make it not a rental.

So if you call one a rental, call both a rental.
The main difference is if I'm not able to connect to steam's server it won't stop me from saving and enjoying the game I've purchased. If I'm not able to connect to ubisoft's I won't be able to do that, so it's more on par with a rental than steam is because it is more restricting.

Jimmy Damage
03-12-2010, 04:11 AM
$60 without the ubi DRM. $0 with the DRM.

StingingVelvet
03-12-2010, 04:57 AM
The main difference is if I'm not able to connect to steam's server it won't stop me from saving and enjoying the game I've purchased. If I'm not able to connect to ubisoft's I won't be able to do that, so it's more on par with a rental than steam is because it is more restricting.

That... makes no sense to me.

But whatever, it's your right to use the term as you desire I suppose. When people talk about DRM making something a rental though, they mean you don't really own it, as in you only own account access or the like. This applies to Steam, AC2 and MMOs and other such things.

That's the typical meaning of the term.

Furyo
03-12-2010, 07:03 AM
Not a single penny while it uses uplay.

I still haven't picked up Chronically of Riddick: Assault on Dark Athana despite it being on sale for $5 or under multipul times, simply because it still uses Tages.

I am one of the few people for whom price really isn't the point or the concern, but the principal of the it all means everything.

Uplay and the DRM are two completely different things. Uplay is a Steam like services platform built in the game, while the DRM is the software that controls access to the game.

Void(null)
03-12-2010, 08:29 AM
Uplay and the DRM are two completely different things. Uplay is a Steam like services platform built in the game, while the DRM is the software that controls access to the game.

Thanks, didn't know that. I thought Ubisoft had directly linked the DRM to UPlay so that they became a single service (Much like how Steam and Steamworks are integrated.), good to know they are at least separate.

tripph
03-12-2010, 09:17 AM
That... makes no sense to me.

But whatever, it's your right to use the term as you desire I suppose. When people talk about DRM making something a rental though, they mean you don't really own it, as in you only own account access or the like. This applies to Steam, AC2 and MMOs and other such things.

That's the typical meaning of the term.


I'll try to make my pov make more sense then. .With steam we're still able to access our purchases through off line mode. .right? With ubisoft's account we can't do such a thing. .correct? But requiring it to the point where I basically need ubisoft's permission to play my purchases every single time is what makes it seem like an expensive rental to me. If that's not the correct use of the term then sorry, but that's how I view it. It makes more sense with MMOs because they're solely online games, people aren't going to buy an MMO and expect to be able to play it whenever they want, but single players people do, for example I play Mass Effect 1 off steam at some locations where there is no internet access but Steam allows me play and save it still without connecting to their servers.

If they wanted to make it option like it is with some steam games and games for windows live games then cool, for example Fallout 3, if you play through a live account then you can't access that save unless you connect to that live account, but you can also start a new game in its version of an "off line mode" where you can save and progress still, the only difference is you won't get achievements. The thing here though it's optional, while Ubisoft's isn't.

Smertnik
03-12-2010, 11:56 AM
I could consider getting it for about $10.

PaddyM
03-12-2010, 12:20 PM
I wouldn't play the game for free if the current DRM was included. The cost isn't the issue for me. In fact, I'd pay the current [arguably overly high] price gladly if the DRM issue was resolved, the first game in the series was certainly worth the money. It's a matter principle, even if the DRM worked as it's supposed to (which it apparently doesn't, at least not consistently).

Royas
03-12-2010, 01:02 PM
Time and time again, you throw words without actually SAYING anything. Yes, whatever it is you have just said we are all aware of. But it has said nothing against the point i just made.

Unless you can come up with an ACTUAL LAW which is being broken if steam follows suit with what is written in the EULA, your whole argument means nothing.

Basically, some of the federal circuit courts have concluded that if the EULA violates the UCC, it can be unenforceable. This is seen in the 3rd and 5th circuits in the examples I've seen. Contradicting that, other circuits have decided that they are enforceable. To further confuse the issue, some states have passed UCITA, which gives much greater power to shrinkwrap licenses, though I think only Maryland and Virginia have passed that. In all other states, the UCC is in force.

One of the landmark cases would be Vernor v. Autodesk, Inc., where the doctrine of first sale was applied in the Washington District Court. California and Texas have also applied it against Adobe and Novell regarding their software.

As I understand it, some EULA provisions may also be in violation of the Clayton Act, as the act of licensing a program can be considered to be an act in the nature of a lease or rental. But now, the legal arguments are getting way too deep for any layman to understand, so I'm going to stop.

Publishers put these EULA's in place because they MIGHT be enforceable, not because they are. Some parts of them are most certainly good, others may not be. It's in the practice of trying to get all that you can. You ask for a lot, in hopes of getting at least some. If they prevail in court, they've won a powerful advantage in the war against the consumer. If they lose, they will likely only lose on a couple of specific provisions, so it's not a complete loss. Not a bad tactic, even if it is a bit underhanded.

Vaemer-Riit
03-12-2010, 06:24 PM
I will not buy this game untill I am able to play without an internet conection.

I ocaisonaly go with my family to West Virginia where we have no internet. I can put my steam in offline mode then shutdown my PC and take it with me and play all of my games fine. Untill I can do that with this game as well I will not buy it.

Mark_VI
03-12-2010, 10:55 PM
Publishers put these EULA's in place because they MIGHT be enforceable, not because they are. Some parts of them are most certainly good, others may not be. It's in the practice of trying to get all that you can. You ask for a lot, in hopes of getting at least some. If they prevail in court, they've won a powerful advantage in the war against the consumer. If they lose, they will likely only lose on a couple of specific provisions, so it's not a complete loss. Not a bad tactic, even if it is a bit underhanded.

I wish more people understood the above. You can put any absurd thing you want in an EULA, that doesn't mean it sticks. Why do you think there is always a provision stating that the rest remains in effect if any provision in the EULA is invalidated? My guess is that this won't be cleared up until congress or the supreme court steps in. If it's congress, I would imagine it will be at the behest of someone making a sizable campaign contribution, after all it has worked for Disney and Mickey Mouse:
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/commentary/20020305_sprigman.html

Not to beat a dead horse, but I said $5 because it feels like a rental. Someone responded with a comment about the quality of the game. I don't think I was clear. It feels like a rental because of the DRM, not because of the gameplay (which I've heard is quite good). And for those of you saying "well, Steam is the same thing" that isn't precisely true. Ubisoft can exercise a greater degree of control over my access than Steam can. Most of my Steam games are single player, and going offline is always an option.

StingingVelvet
03-13-2010, 12:17 AM
EULAs are not law, this is true.

The more something is a service though, the less it is covered by consumer protections on point of sale purchases. For instance Steam sales versus Gamestop sales, there would be a massive difference in a court when deciding what EULA provisions apply.

MetroSmurf
03-13-2010, 12:41 AM
with drm: 0
without drm: 0

I dont care if they patch out the drm now or in 10 years, ubisoft is on my banlist because of their own stupid actions, this means i will never ever be able to play future ubi games, but honestly i dont care anymore.

I could care less about DRM. Sadly, the vast majority of the DRM-Hater's club really don't know what they're hating. Rather, they take their queues from ♥♥♥-tards.

Regardless, I will never buy another UBI game. Why? They killed the Splinter Cell series with the release of SC Double Agent which was so buggy that very few were actually able to play the game. And subsequent follow up by the community to get UBI to patch the game fell on deaf ears.

And it's not that UBI released one buggy game; its that UBI never attempted to correct the problems and moved on to the next product. :(

Until we speak with our wallets, they will never listen.

revoc
03-13-2010, 12:45 AM
This game is worth $4.99. No more, no less.

No DRM, but Steam = wouldn't pay more than $39.99. $29.99 and lower is more like it.

Retail box, no Securom, no internet activation = I would have paid $49.99.

freeloader105
03-13-2010, 12:47 AM
Publishers put these EULA's in place because they MIGHT be enforceable, not because they are. Some parts of them are most certainly good, others may not be. It's in the practice of trying to get all that you can. You ask for a lot, in hopes of getting at least some. If they prevail in court, they've won a powerful advantage in the war against the consumer. If they lose, they will likely only lose on a couple of specific provisions, so it's not a complete loss. Not a bad tactic, even if it is a bit underhanded.

That's very insightful. I never thought about it that way. Most people just accept EULAs as universal law.

Selfdestructive
03-13-2010, 12:50 AM
I could care less about DRM. Sadly, the vast majority of the DRM-Hater's club really don't know what they're hating. Rather, they take their queues from ♥♥♥-tards.

Regardless, I will never buy another UBI game. Why? They killed the Splinter Cell series with the release of SC Double Agent which was so buggy that very few were actually able to play the game. And subsequent follow up by the community to get UBI to patch the game fell on deaf ears.

And it's not that UBI released one buggy game; its that UBI never attempted to correct the problems and moved on to the next product. :(

Until we speak with our wallets, they will never listen.


I have all SC available on steam, bought them last yeah all toghether, and guess what, the MP doesnt work on any of them....

I bought H.A.W.X. last year, the Multi player was horrible the server browser is the worst ever, you must be lucky to find somethign on the server if you dont find something immediatly you had better restart the game, when a match ends yo umay not always find any game either on the browser and if you refresh it will just say 0 games found.
Oh and it does disconnect all by itself too. All of this happens still, no patch ever came out to fix all those bugs. The Mp is pretty much dead now, god knows how soon b4 the master server is shut down.

Number1Assassin
03-13-2010, 03:12 AM
As the old guy with the chicks on TV of RoboCop says, "I'll Buy That For A Dollar!". :P

solidetuber
03-13-2010, 03:47 AM
whats so bad about the ♥♥♥kin drm stop ♥♥♥♥♥ing

spyrochaete
03-13-2010, 05:05 AM
I would hope not too many toddlers also have your steam login details and/or credit card details.

The EULA is there for a reason, if it really has no legal standing as you guys seem to think so, then it would not exist.

A EULA has as much legal bearing as a sign at a parking lot that says "not responsible for lost or stolen items". If you find the parking attendant's bright green hat on the passenger seat next to where your car stereo used to be then you've got a legal case, despite what the sign says.

EULAs are just a first line of legal defense. They're an attempt to dismiss potential lawsuits. They're not the 10 commandments. They can be challenged by anyone.

SKiLLY2
03-13-2010, 06:41 AM
I will pay $20 for it because I don't think it's worth any more than that. Had it arrived at the same time as consoles, not included restrictive DRM, and was $50 as opposed to the now $65 (lol) I, and I'm sure many others, would have bought it.

Royas
03-13-2010, 06:53 AM
EULAs are not law, this is true.

The more something is a service though, the less it is covered by consumer protections on point of sale purchases. For instance Steam sales versus Gamestop sales, there would be a massive difference in a court when deciding what EULA provisions apply.

Very possibly true. I'm no attorney, but that sort of makes sense. A lot of it will depend, I imagine, on how things are perceived by the consumer as well. If the majority of people perceive something as a product, the courts will be inclined to treat it that way. If it's perceived as a service, then the opposite might be true. Personally, I perceive the games I get from Steam to be products, just intangible products. The actual Steam store is a service. Really, until it's taken and tested before the Supreme Court, it's anyone's guess how things will play out.

Crass Spektakel
03-13-2010, 07:33 AM
Considering the DRM: I would take it as a present.

I might even say "Thank you".

Usually after one year games get rereleased without DRM and a price around 10, thats fine with me.

If not, well, other mothers have pretty daughters too.

Taz
03-13-2010, 11:35 AM
I am curious as to what the net traffic looks like between AC2 and Ubi's servers. Hopefully someone else will get the same idea and set up a protocol analyzer between their gaming rig and the Net and report back.

freeloader105
03-13-2010, 12:09 PM
I am curious as to what the net traffic looks like between AC2 and Ubi's servers. Hopefully someone else will get the same idea and set up a protocol analyzer between their gaming rig and the Net and report back.

I read somewhere on a forum that if you ran it for 24 hours straight, it would be between 1-3 MB.

Taz
03-13-2010, 12:19 PM
I read somewhere on a forum that if you ran it for 24 hours straight, it would be between 1-3 MB.

I am more interested in the payload than bandwidth statistics.

MasterJan91
03-13-2010, 12:26 PM
yeah once there is a working crack for it.

ssssht, don't say that here. it can get you banned! :p

omnithrope
03-13-2010, 12:42 PM
They couldn't pay me enough to purchase this game after the DRM debacle. I will never buy another Ubisoft game again. Period.

F U Ubisoft.

GrimCW
03-13-2010, 01:55 PM
for a SINGLE PLAYER only game.. $20 to $30 sounds about right. but for an SP only game that requires internet connection.. $0 or a used console version.

BrianHanna
03-13-2010, 02:04 PM
i would pay 60 dollars the moment the drm was moved.

Mark_VI
03-13-2010, 03:20 PM
EULAs are not law, this is true.

The more something is a service though, the less it is covered by consumer protections on point of sale purchases. For instance Steam sales versus Gamestop sales, there would be a massive difference in a court when deciding what EULA provisions apply.

I'm not a lawyer, but I would imagine that courts might see it that way. I'm guessing that a physical copy will be seen differently than a digital copy.

koverrev
03-13-2010, 03:43 PM
... Rapidshare = Free :)

With Rapidshare we won't have to worry about prices! ... or DRM :)

YAY!

Taz
03-24-2010, 12:27 PM
After careful consideration, I've decided that I would definitely pick up this game if Ubisoft removed the DRM and paid me $60...an hour...to play it.

Yeah, that sounds about right. ;)

ElizLestrad
03-24-2010, 09:09 PM
$49.95 Regular
$55.00 Director's Cut

Devicula
03-24-2010, 10:00 PM
With the current DRM? It's worthless.

Even without it, $60 is absurd for a four month old console port without any PC only features. I'd pay no more than $30.

I've already played it on the Xbox, and the only reason I paid $60 for it is because I knew I could resell it after I was finished with it.

Freyar
03-24-2010, 10:26 PM
[...]is absurd for a four month old console port without any PC only features.

Because saving on a cloud system, and visual quality beyond what the 360 is capable of aren't.

MetroSmurf
03-24-2010, 11:09 PM
Because saving on a cloud system, and visual quality beyond what the 360 is capable of aren't.

Assuming the PC version is even supported by Ubisoft which has a propensity of selling PC games without supporting them or much worse... being madly bug ridden ;)

Devicula
03-25-2010, 04:30 AM
Because saving on a cloud system, and visual quality beyond what the 360 is capable of aren't.

Sorry, I just don't see cloud saves as a feature I take into consideration when purchasing software, and the visual quality of the game is likely to be on a par with other console ports so I'm not moved to part with $60 to look at it, either.

hello moto
03-25-2010, 04:54 AM
20-30AU

Solink
03-25-2010, 05:42 AM
I have no problem with this DRM if the game is around 15-20. I will not pay full price.

cristianesza
03-25-2010, 05:55 AM
and the visual quality of the game is likely to be on a par with other console ports so I'm not moved to part with $60 to look at it, either.

No.

If you haven't seen it already, the visual quality on the PC version is much higher.

And if you have seen it but you didn't notice the difference, then you shouldn't be playing on PCs, move to consoles so you will save money on hardware.

Devicula
03-25-2010, 06:35 AM
No.

If you haven't seen it already, the visual quality on the PC version is much higher.

And if you have seen it but you didn't notice the difference, then you shouldn't be playing on PCs, move to consoles so you will save money on hardware.

Like I said before, I'm not interested in paying $60 to see the difference; as their console port of Assassin's Creed was not impressive, but at least it had PC exclusive features and did not cost as much as the console version. Paying more and getting less is not my idea of "value added".

Your advice on which platform suits my gaming needs is duly noted, and disregarded.

Thanks a bunch for your imput, though.

zeus710
03-25-2010, 08:13 AM
Do you think guys there will be some discount on steam? It sold much cheaper on Amazon.UK and play.com.uk. Even you can download it directly from Ubisoft, paying 49.99$. And only on steam it costs 59.99$:confused:

AirWolf
03-25-2010, 08:24 AM
With the current DRM, I would only pay $19.95.

DJ_Professor_K
03-25-2010, 08:33 AM
Do you think guys there will be some discount on steam? It sold much cheaper on Amazon.UK and play.com.uk. Even you can download it directly from Ubisoft, paying 49.99$. And only on steam it costs 59.99$:confused:

There will, but not anytime soon.

zeus710
03-25-2010, 10:32 AM
There will, but not anytime soon.

Can somebody explain me why it's more expensive on steam???

freeloader105
03-25-2010, 06:36 PM
Can somebody explain me why it's more expensive on steam???

Because publishing a game over the internet is MUCH more expensive than the traditional ways. Just kidding.. You'd think digitally distributed games would be cheaper, but no, I guess we don't understand the 'bigger picture' (the profit margins).

Anyway, I don't think it's more expensive on Steam than through other retail channels. It's $60 (USD) everywhere, unless on a discount.

InternetsUser
03-25-2010, 08:26 PM
Can somebody explain me why it's more expensive on steam???

Profits, baby.

Games typically don't sell for less on Steam, and never have. The exception is the Steam deals, which, as we know, totally rock.

zeus710
03-26-2010, 02:45 AM
Now i see the light! :-) thanks for answers. I'll wait for a discount. As somebody said here with so many good games it doesn't burn me to buy it now

imershon
03-26-2010, 03:39 AM
Until DRM is COMPLETELY REMOVED then the dollars remain in my pocket.

ChronicIntel
03-26-2010, 06:15 AM
I was going to buy it as soon as it was available for PC, but I found it on sale at Gamestop for $40 for the console version. Since I typically game on a laptop with a spotty wi-fi connection, the console version seemed much more attractive. Why pay $60 for a SP game with a restrictive DRM scheme?

Still, I haven't played it all that much on the PS3, but if sometime down the road I decide to play through it again, I might get it for PC... if the price is right ($20-30), and the online features are optional rather than required.

Can somebody explain me why it's more expensive on steam???

Steam prices are the same as retail prices to prevent competition so the retailers don't go out of business, but like what was said earlier, Steam makes up for it by offering discounts occasionally.

Royas
03-26-2010, 07:42 AM
With the DRM, I'd be willing to buy it for about $5. Not because it's a bad game, but because with the DRM, it's a rental. $5 is about right for a rental. Without the DRM, I'd go $30. It's a console port, several months old. It's not worth the AAA price of $50, much less the inflated $60 price here on Steam. Ubisoft is insane on so many levels.

Mark_VI
03-26-2010, 03:18 PM
With the DRM, I'd be willing to buy it for about $5. Not because it's a bad game, but because with the DRM, it's a rental. $5 is about right for a rental. Without the DRM, I'd go $30. It's a console port, several months old. It's not worth the AAA price of $50, much less the inflated $60 price here on Steam. Ubisoft is insane on so many levels.

I can't understand the logic that leads Ubisoft to believe that people will pay $60 when the console version can be had for $30 new. I prefer my PC to a console, but not enough to justify that kind of price difference.

Zone_Dymo
03-28-2010, 01:32 AM
I would buy it right now if it was on sale for 25 euro.

Paul_cz
03-28-2010, 09:25 AM
I just ordered it for 25 bucks from UK retail e-shop.That is acceptable price for me, even with DRM. Of course I would prefer if it was not there. But my connection is perfectly stable, so I am not that worried.

Shadow_Man_PW
03-30-2010, 06:46 PM
I would buy it right now if it was on sale for 25 euro.

Agreed. E60 is too much for me for any game and E50 is reserved only for titles I'm in love with. That and getting it for 75% off is always nice :)

bumblebee200
04-02-2010, 09:16 PM
$10. I really need this game.

sarrik
04-02-2010, 10:15 PM
I bought at steam price of $64.99USD for the "Deluxe" edition.
Currently, it's pretty much the same game with a new storyline and very slightly improved graphics.
The DRM hasn't bothered me at all. I'm used to logging into games, even when they are single player only.
Case in point, Dragon Age. I love that game to bits, but the login\DLC system is pathetic. Still. I'll put up with it just to play a good game.

And the DRM in AC2, as far as I can tell is not so bad.
You log in, you play.

Of the people who complained about this, how many play WoW, or other MMO's but don't moan about logging in?

Chances are that most gamers are always connected. Even us backwards aussies are. We'd love higher speeds, but what we've got is enough to keep this game and most of those with much higher bandwidth demands happy.

Jito463
04-03-2010, 11:22 AM
Please, stop bringing up the "WoW" argument. It's been beaten to death, and proved time and again that it has no relevance to the argument.

Number1Assassin
04-03-2010, 11:44 AM
10 bucks and I might overlook the DRM issue. :P

Mark_VI
04-03-2010, 08:10 PM
I bought at steam price of $64.99USD for the "Deluxe" edition.
Currently, it's pretty much the same game with a new storyline and very slightly improved graphics.
The DRM hasn't bothered me at all. I'm used to logging into games, even when they are single player only.
Case in point, Dragon Age. I love that game to bits, but the login\DLC system is pathetic. Still. I'll put up with it just to play a good game.

And the DRM in AC2, as far as I can tell is not so bad.
You log in, you play.

Of the people who complained about this, how many play WoW, or other MMO's but don't moan about logging in?

Chances are that most gamers are always connected. Even us backwards aussies are. We'd love higher speeds, but what we've got is enough to keep this game and most of those with much higher bandwidth demands happy.

Can we please drop this argument? The online server is necessary for a game like WOW to function since the entire point of the game is to interact with other people. Obviously AC2 is a completely different animal.

sarrik
04-04-2010, 01:12 AM
Can we please drop this argument? The online server is necessary for a game like WOW to function since the entire point of the game is to interact with other people. Obviously AC2 is a completely different animal.

Ok, dropped. It's a bad example anyway.
How many Steam users are not always connected, though? Is it so much trouble to wait a few seconds?

zeus710
04-04-2010, 02:35 AM
the issue now is not about Steam users (who know what they buy and if they buy games on steam they are happy with it and have nothing against being connected to internet constantly). The issue I think about strict anti-piracy DRM that makes life of fair players miserable because many of them have internet problems.

I don't understand why game developers think that dracon anti-piracy measures could fight this issue. People who don't have money to buy the game for 60$ never buy it. Make reasonable prices and don't be so greedy (greed is a sin) and you earn much more because more people will buy it (like all great specials on steam)

sarrik
04-04-2010, 10:52 PM
the issue now is not about Steam users (who know what they buy and if they buy games on steam they are happy with it and have nothing against being connected to internet constantly). The issue I think about strict anti-piracy DRM that makes life of fair players miserable because many of them have internet problems.

I don't understand why game developers think that dracon anti-piracy measures could fight this issue. People who don't have money to buy the game for 60$ never buy it. Make reasonable prices and don't be so greedy (greed is a sin) and you earn much more because more people will buy it (like all great specials on steam)
I guess my point is that this DRM isn't so bad. I've been on the receiving end of DRM that considers everyone a pirate, then allows only those who meet it's standards to play. That is something worth complaining about. Guilty until proven innocent.

I still have burning software, and I still have devices that can be used by pirates. I have no intention of using them to pirate a game, and this DRM doesn't appear to hate me for it.

As for greed being a sin, don't you think that games would cost less if publishers didn't have to waste money on DRM?
You may consider greed a sin, but so should you consider theft in the same light.

zeus710
04-10-2010, 03:19 PM
People will download pirated copies, till the prices will drop down to a reasonable price. If this game could be sold for 25$ in UK retail store it means it could be sold for 25$ all over the world and not for 60$ for Americans or 50 euro for Europeans.

By the way I don't justify anything, but Pirates are most devoted gamers and i am sure for reasonable price they would buy games and not download them from internet.

Moragami
04-23-2010, 10:56 AM
$20.75 was the price I paid, new, from Amazon.

DVSBSTD
04-24-2010, 08:35 AM
Shoddy port with performance and mouse issues and a pathetic DRM - $5

Moragami
04-30-2010, 11:32 AM
Shoddy port with performance and mouse issues and a pathetic DRM - $5

Wrong, this game is an excellent port, of an excellent game. DRM hasn't affected my experience one little bit. A campaign that last over 15 hours. I would definitely pay $50 for this game. I'm glad I didn't have to, but after playing, I can definitely say the game is worth it.

I highly recommend a controller, works great with the 360 controller. Keyboard settings are a little difficult to master, I don't play with the mouse, so I can't really speak to that..

Ravenger
04-30-2010, 02:46 PM
I wouldn't even accept a free copy with this DRM scheme - just out of principle. This sort of DRM should never be allowed in a single player game.

zeus710
05-03-2010, 11:22 AM
I finally bought this game for 26$. For my region it's very cheap. And this game is really great. I was a big fan of the first game and this one is much better. I don't agree it's a bad port. I play with mouse and keyboard and it's totally ok. Only one thing sometimes annoys me - it's the camera's view.

Somebody paid here 20$ and it's the most reasonable price (25$ is the max for the single player game).

i play for 2 weeks and never had any problems with the DRM. I have a cable 5 mb internet (not 20 mb uber connection) and never had any problems

DustArma
05-05-2010, 07:39 PM
I payed $35, just because that's the price it gets in my country.

And all of those who oppose Ubi's DRM, this is the steampowered forums, so I assumes you play steam games, and steam is a DRM, way to go, hypocrites.

Jito463
05-05-2010, 07:58 PM
And all of those who oppose Ubi's DRM, this is the steampowered forums, so I assumes you play steam games, and steam is a DRM, way to go, hypocrites.

You can always tell the ones who don't bother to read a thread before they jump right in. As Samuel Clemens (better known as Mark Twain) once said:

It's better to leave your mouth shut, and be thought a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt.

DustArma
05-05-2010, 08:14 PM
You can always tell the ones who don't bother to read a thread before they jump right in. As Samuel Clemens (better known as Mark Twain) once said:

Actually, I did read the thread as you can see by my response of paying $35, and I did get carried out with the DRM response.

So, let me take my time while I use your own quote agaisnt you.

"You can always tell the ones who don't bother to read a thread before they jump right in", just as Mark Twain and Jito463 said in their times. :cool:

ZeroSignal
05-06-2010, 12:30 AM
$60.. on the PlayStation 3 or XBox 360.

If this game used activation (BioShock, Far Cry 2, Dead Space (retail) Mass Effect 1 (retail)).. then I really wouldn't care. Steam makes you have an internet at one point or another to authenticate your games (Offline mode for when you have no internet). Activation is a similar concept. You have to be online to activate it.. then you can play.. irregardless of your connectivity.

Ubisofts DRM is constant connectivity.

All who would compare Steams DRM to Ubisoft need to research this more before opening their mouths.

Garone
05-06-2010, 02:49 AM
Remove the DRM, make it less repetitive, fix the combat. 49,99$.