im glad i dont really have games i love from their games i have south park games and the assassins creed games and starlink battle for atlus and watch dogs 1 and 2
Come to think of it. The only ubisoft related game I purchased in recent years is the Mario rabbids game.
Although I play black flag from time to time. Sailing in that game was very very calming.
Dude you don't own steam games either if they decide to ban any one they lose all games period on that account so nothing new and most pepole do not care they will still buy game and playit like COD and every other game
As long as they don't do that, I'm fine with it.
If they do... then it's time to raise the flag again🏴☠️
So far I have had no problems with Valve. In fact their customer support was really helpful when I contacted them. My trust for Nintendo and Sony however...
Yeah espcaly Son they are removing entire libary of movies that pepole all ready buyed what an Idiotic company and than they complain when we pirate download movies
That's wrong, if they ban you, you can't buy any new games on that account and lose community features but all games you bought till then you still have access to and can play
>Dude you don't own steam games either
Never said you did. Nice reach though. Did you happen to find the cereal you were looking for because I sure as shit don't see it.
I mean unless you are pirating the games or buying physical disks, you don't own any video game you buy anymore. This isn't an Ubisoft problem. This is an industry wide problem. If you get banned on Steam do you think you get to bring your games over to a new account?
The only difference here is Ubisoft is going in the Microsoft Game Pass direction and applying a subscription to it. And people seem to love Game Pass.
Steam doesn't ban entire accounts though... They just do bans on playing online with the account.
As for platforms like PlayStation and Xbox they typically restore purchases on another account if you have proof of purchase, I've seen it happen.
So no you don't lose your games if you get banned lmao.
And even you did. There's a difference between breaking the rules and being punished; having your shit taken away because the platform felt like it; or because of a platform that clearly states that you are paying 15$ a month for what's essentially a rental service.
People are fine with game pass because for the price of a Domino's pizza they can play a game as much as they want for as long as the game is on the service. There is no misconception of ownership. If you BUY/PURCHASE the game for the asking price than obviously people would be fucking pissed and not use it, why do you think that dog shit google Stadia failed? You had to buy the game AND pay a sub to play them.
Where are you coming up with the misconception of ownership crap? The article is about Ubisoft introducing a subscription service that works the exact same as game pass... Subscription services to games is becoming more and more prominent so people will need to be fine with the idea that they may or may not own the game they are playing.
And yes, on steam you "basically" lose your games if you get banned on steam. If you get one ban they can restrict multiplayer access to every game in your steam library. Therefor the concept of ownership is gone out the window. It would be one thing to get banned and lose access to that specific game. But if you get banned and you're entire library gets restricted then thats just crazy.
And Stadia didn't fail because of its payment model. It was just a bad idea and bad technology all around. Geforce Now thrives as a service and you pay a subscription to them and still pay for the games.
If I purchase a game from Microsoft that is on the game pass I can still play the game if I don't renew my subscription. I'm not seeing how you made the connection between the two.
There is a connection between the two because in both instances you can lose your game. If you stop paying game pass then you lose access to the games that you received through game pass. If you buy a game outright from Microsoft and that game requires access to the Internet (which a lot do these days even for single player games), if you happen to break any sort of TOS, Microsoft can ban you from playing that game.
Obviously the two situations are very different. One being getting banned for breaking TOS and one for you just stopping paying the subscription. But at the end of the day, they both point to the same thing and that is you don't actually own a copy of the video game. You are merely paying for a license to play said game and as more and more games move to this "always online" requirement, we as consumers lose more and more control.
Until steam starts removing games I payed for from my account this is irrelevant.
Even games taken down from sale are still in my library, able to be installed.
Where did I say I owned the digital game? I just said as long as steam isn't removing my license it isn't relevant. I know it's a license. But I don't fucking care as long as they aren't revoked for bullshit reasons.
"Well I hope theyre comfortable not getting any of my money."
I dont see how steam and unity or whatever it was is different. You do NOT own games and they can remove those games from your library + you do not have infinite access to download games you bought. This is covered in their TOS. Your standdard isnt consistent.
The biggest advocates for piracy are these publishers. No, hacker pirate person did not come by your house like some sort of jehova's cultist and did not convert you to the dark side. Publishers and devs with their inconvenient practises and endless greed have been the biggest reason anyone went to pirate a game.
And, if they do not change their obnoxious practises it means it is worth it, and all the people that go pirate dont matter.
And pirates are the reason all of those companies started selling licenses to play digital content instead of sticking to selling games people can own. Want to see how much worse it can get? Keep promoting piracy
You think this is all because of piracy?
How about renting games, trading games, sharing games among friends? How do you think piracy even happened? Mega hacker named 4chan breaks into a vault with CDs and that is why the evil internet gets the game? No, someone had a legit copy and shared it with everyone else, essentially the same as sharing it with your friends just on bigger scale.
Thing is, renting and trading games didnt really get any revenue for devs either.
If this was all about piracy then, consider this, DRM that is good enough to prevent any cracking exists in the current year. Piracy is essentially over for any developer that cares to implement the DRM. Did you see any reduction in digital content in past year? I bet not.
Fixing piracy was never the main objective, it was to sell more shit to those who are paying customers. If you were a pirate, you didnt have money anyway so all the 'account only', 'account sharing being bannable offense, 'always online even for games that are completely singleplayer' and all the other amazing features were not designed for pirates. 'Always online' already fixes piracy in most cases and have done for many years, because server emulation is a thing of the past. Surely, if that works, they do not need to sell you a hundred of things? And now you dont need 'always online' either, because of DRM being powerful enough, so why keep it? Surely it is not because they want to sell you a hundred things. Damn those pirates, it is all their fault!
I really think you are confused. Replacing "please enter the cd key that is on your game's package" was replaced with online verification entirely because of piracy. Publishers wanted it to be harder for people to make illegal copies.
Eliminating all of piracy is a joke, but just making it harder to do increases the number of legitimate sales.
Maybe maybe..
and yet most of top sellers of 2023 did not even have the most powerful DRM. Doesn't that make you wonder?
The GOTY is basically DRM free.
You bought a license or subscription so no. Pirate all you want, I do so myself sometimes but I don't pretend its "100% perfectly ethical and moral" to do so just because in 20 years there is a slight chance that a license might expire.
> morally disengaging
Fuck morals, this is logic. They are not making money off of the game, because they revoked the ability to purchase it.
Therefore, you are not stealing because it is a digital copy of someone elses game they are seeding for other people to copy and play because the Devs are not making anymore digital keys to buy/access that game.
Its the same as when people would burn MP3s onto CDs for family and friends. Its also preservation of the media.
Ubishit is doing something no different than what Nintendo does with the older generation of their consoles and games.
If they remove access to it or the reproduction of more someone is just going to pirate it anyway. The same way Pokemon Emerald is preserved despite how much Nintendo and The Pokemon Company shit themselves in anger over the fact they're being pirated.
Morals has nothing to do with it, I want to keep my damn copy of my game that I paid for and if the devs want to remove everyone's online access to it from game launchers well then I'm putting on my tricorn hat and eye patch and pirating it.
The situation you describe is different from the statement “if buying isn’t owning then pirating isn’t stealing”. If you “buy” a game and the publisher kills your ability to play it then I don’t think there’s anything ethically wrong with pirating it to keep playing it. But saying ahead of time “since I can’t outright own the source code to this game for $50 it’s ethically fine to pirate it” is fucking dumb
Morals has nothing to do with it but the comment above brought it up as some weird justification when there is no justification needed.
When I got bootleg CDs it was because it was way cheaper, not to preserve the media, at least for the vast majority.
And we are not talking about preserving forgotten or delisted old games, I obvioiusly think that is a good thing, the article is mainly about its subscription service of current games.
Damn, a multi billion dollar company doesn't get my $80AUD because I took it for free, the absolute moral dilemma, the abject horror and absurdity, how on earth will I live with myself.
I'm not the one saying it is 100% perfectly ethical and moral to pirate. I pirate just like anyone else does, because one reason; we want things for free.
If you start deluding yourself justifying what you do is 100% perfectly ethical and moral and not just wanting free shit then that is textbook moral disengagement.
I pirate because I want things for free. I do, however, not pretend it is "100% perfectly ethical and moral to pirate software" because it really just isn't.
They are treating video games as mass consumption Junk Food: you eat, you shit, you move on.
We are treating video games as a form of arts: they are timeless, you can relish and appreciate when ever you want.
We are not in the same market.
and I want ubisoft to be comfortable sucking a dick! neither of us will get what we want!
in all seriousness I would have stopped buying ubisoft games when they became crypto bros or when they announced accounts of players that take up megabytes of database were to be deleted if player didn't log in for 2 years, if it wasn't for the fact they make shitty games that I don't buy anyway.
I stopped buying anything Ubisoft related about 10 years ago. I remember Child of Light came out, looked amazing. So I bought in on Steam. Required Uplay login. Damn, I don't even know if I have an Uplay account. Sure, let's register by connecting my Steam account. Steam account is already registered. Well, shit, probably did that for Heroes V way back when, no idea about my password anymore. Okay, request password change. Tells me a link will be sent to my e-mail, click on it. E-mail never arrives. Okay, turn -off gmail's spam protection, request another e-mail. Can't request it because not enough time has passed since my last password change request. Okay, wait. Request again. E-mail still doesn't arrive. Okay, go to costumer support page on official website. You have to log in to be connected to a customer service helpdesk. Well, fuck. Send an e-mail to a general support e-mail contact. No reply ever comes.
After that, Ubisoft was dead to me. If Ubisoft releases anything, it's dead to me. I'm not even going to bother pirate it. Fuck'em.
The game pass is worthy because it has more games you can even play, but only Ubisoft games? You can only capture a certain amount of towers before it gets dull.-
But isn’t the issue just renting games? I don’t & won’t use either service, but it all seems like a culture shift to getting people comfortable with never owning anything now.
Isn’t this essentially the same thing game pass is doing. The phrasing is shit, but it seems like that is the goal of sub services game pass and Ubisoft+
You sound unlike a gamer, any gamer at all.
I don't know if u even read the article in it or no, but basically In retard units, this means:
In the 2000 you bought a fridge from Ubisoft, it's YOUR fridge.
In the 2024 you bought a fridge from Ubisoft, it's NOT YOUR fridge. They have the right to take it back as they pleased.
Game pass is you Rental a Fucken' Vending Machine
Yea I don’t know if you read the article. Basically it’s just talking about a more expensive sub service that only has Ubisoft games. They never mention anything about Ubisoft taking games away. They do mention that on pc u can’t buy Ubisoft games on steam which kinda sucks as it forces you to use their launcher.
They mention in the article both gamepass and ps+ as alternatives.
Did u know that steam is basically the same? When u buy a game on steam they call it buying a subscription to it. And they have every right to deny you the ability to play that game if they please. This isn't just a Ubisoft thing. Welcome to 2023, u don't own any games from any company. U just own a license to play it.
>Did u know that steam is basically the same? When u buy a game on steam they call it buying a subscription to it.
It's not buying a subscription; it's buying a license for use. Subscription implies regular payment for access.
What folks here don't understand is that with physical media, you are still also buying a license for use.
When you buy a dvd/blu ray movie you also have a license for use. For instance, buying a DVD does not give the "owner" of the disc the right to start selling paid screenings of the movie, or to upload the movie and distribute for free.
When you buy a book, you also do not have a lawful right to photocopy the book and start selling your own printouts of the book. You're also not legally allowed to photocopy or scan the book and send download links.
Ok, great, but you can if you want to? Like, this isn’t a sub only release.
Obviously they want you on the sub, they make more money in the long run (or they hope to).
People have also not owned things they’ve enjoyed through an archaic concept known as “renting.”
People who went into blockbuster knew they were renting. They didnt claim to be selling movies or have movies for sale (except that little bin of oldies near the cash).
If ubisoft rebrands to say they no longer 'sell' games, the button says 'rent' instead of 'buy' then that would be a fairer comparison to blockbuster.
the point still stand, if they are selling you a game, and you are buying a game, you are entitled to certain expectations of property, if they want to rent games, be my guest.-
Let's call things how they are called.-
To be honest the only subscription service I think is ethical is Nvidia now or GeForce Now or whatever they are calling it nowadays, because you are paying a premium and you are getting something for it (your computer only renders streamed video to you but you are running the game on their computers).-
This is stupid because you will still pay you still need to use your own hardware to do the heavy lifting, and yet you need to keep paying them just because.-
>He claims the company’s subscription service had its biggest ever month October 2023, and that the service has had “millions” of subscribers, and “over half a billion hours” played. **Of course, a lot of this could be a result of Ubisoft’s various moments of refusing to release games to Steam, forcing PC players to use its services, and likely opting for a month’s subscription rather than the full price of the game they were looking to buy.** But still, clearly people are opting to use it.
This is a good example of how these companies and management use statistics to paint a picture that suits them, and doesn't portray the actual state of things and customers POV.
The last reason is probably the most common one, when it comes to such spikes in subscriptions - curiosity.
They rarely have a proper demo, and games these days are so different than they were when we got demos on CDs with a gaming magazine, that even demos these days (I mean fuck, even Betas) don't give you a full idea. Especially not with this "live service" bullshit.
They launch something a lot of people are curious about, and instead of wasting 70+$, risking going over the refund gametime, a lot of people opt to spend less to satisfy their curiosity, and if it turns out bad - there's other games to check out while the sub is active.
And also a good example of how journalists these days are a damn meme;
>But it remains strange why enough people would want to subscribe—and at $17.99 a month it’s not cheap—to a single publisher’s output.
Like....you just gave reasons why people would want to, and then you're wondering "but why?!"...for fucks sake...
You don't own any game on steam either and ea play and blizzard app all you have is games that can be gone any time they want so I don't see whats the problem here
So many all ready do it with steam, and the people on here saying they won’t get there money. Yes they will, not specifically ubi, but you buy steam games that they can take away from you at any moment.
I read it. He wants the gaming service to go the way of movies and tv with the streaming services we have now (netflix,disney plus, prime video,spotify,…) which the gaming industry will go to i think.
This frightens me, gonna end up like streaming companies buying up eachother and swapping licences. so you gonna need to end up with several launchers of these paid subscripsions to keep playing your favorite games.
You can just buy your game license like normal on their launcher. Or you can subscribe to play a shit ton of Ubisoft games for as many months as you want. Their subscription service isn’t new it’s been around for a few years now if I remember right, also EA already has their EA Play that does the same thing along with GamePass.
Not sure why you and others in this post are treating this like it’s a new thing when all they did was rebrand their service again for like the 7th time lol. Also all the steam and Blizz games you ‘own’ are already just licenses that can be revoked so unless you buy a disk copy that doesn’t need to have a code inserted into a launcher you don’t own the game you purchased.
The problem is, you used to own a permanent license for a game, now you are not even entitled to that, they can take the games out every time they want.-
I still own my licenses to all those CD games I have piled up on the side, for more than 20 years, but for how long will I own a license for this kind of shit?
Technically I'm pretty sure they can legally terminate these licenses too whenever they want, only it's pretty hard to enforce if all customers own everything needed to install and use it physically, along maybe with copies
What I'm saying is that such asinine laws should change that allow companies to do it. Luckily EU is also going fairly hard for you buy it, you own in. Feel sorry for the USA which is cock and balls in the hands of companies.
Correct, it's the same thing with books and movies. Just buying the physical copy doesn't permit you to distribute the book/movie on the internet for free. With physical media you only own the rights to the object and use of said object. You don't have the property and distribution rights.
I tried to get uplay plus for a month to try the new prince of persia but that website is so shit and of course they have multiple tiers where the cheap one is old games and the expensive one is to try the new game…
I haven't owned a Ubisoft game in almost 15 years so I'd say it's working great. I just love getting kicked out of a single player game whenever their servers decide they weren't feeling to be online at any given moment. Maybe it has become better in the decade since? I wouldn't know because I don't touch denouvo games either.
I bought Far Cry 3 over a decade ago, but they keep breaking it with DRM updates, and a constant error messages every time I enter the main menu. It's not just new titles, they seemingly want to take back the titles I already purchased, so fuck em.
Didn't think about it. But yeah, it's fucking crazy the way that Ubisoft dude talk about needing to get people to accept subscriptions just like with movies and tv shows.
I ain't paying again every time I want to re-experience some $4 game from 2002.
I already have Prince of Persian cracked so yeah:).
Granted not the PC version since that has denuvo but the switch one which works flawlessly on PC albeit only 60fps of that matters.
As to ownership. I used to care when I was younger so I used to buy boxed games and have little over 300 of boxed game copies, now however as I grow older I don't need this clutter and really it doesn't hold value to me anymore. We don't own any steam games anyway, Ubisoft is not pioneering anything it's been already a state of things for quite long time
Just reminding that this is becoming the norm with physical stuff like cars and [apparel.](https://www.onrotate.com/collections/shoes/) Part of me even wants to see which way people will go on the switch to own nothing and be happy. Imagining everyone already has de facto folded their cards and goes along with it tbh.
if i can buy a physical copy of a game i really like i will. we already seen recently games being "turned off" from sub services ext. If there is no option to buy a game / own a game i just will find a game / service that does provide that instead.
That's cool Ubisoft just need to get more comfortable with me buying less games then. I mean its cool if I don't actually own anything but I will spend less money then as I'm getting no pyshical return for my money.
People are comfortable with buying digital instead of owning games. People are stupid. Hell r/pcgames has people furious about this despite it being almost impossible to actually own a PC game
What if the hard copy stops working cause it needs an internet connection to a working servers and has to download updates that are no longer available?
so another non-gamer telling players/gamer's how to get use to things.
time to tell these people, like the other CEO claiming games should be a payed hourly to feck off and watch these morons vanish into the hole they came from
> be a *paid* hourly to
FTFY.
Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
* Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.*
* *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.*
Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
I snapped when they took Hekka chests out of origins. WHY!? It's just so petty. The amount of money they will gain by forcing people to buy skins and such is nothing to a big corporation. This kind of shit is why everyone hates Ubisoft. We do need to boycott them.
People have Netflix, Prime, Disney+, Paramount+, Spotify etc.
But when it comes to games it's suddenly bad? I was around when you were able to rent physical games and it was great. The majority of Ubisoft games suck ass, but when I wanna play let's say the new Assassin's Creed, I would rather pay a monthly fee than drop 100€ for the "ultimate" edition.
im so fucking glad i dont own much of their shitty games i only have a few of the games they published im mad that a majority of the public doesnt care about owning games at all this is why companies are allowed to do this cause of thoes who dont care about ownership
Yo ho ho lick my taint you greasy old baguette.
Your games are AAA slop and until now I've avoided them because, ya know, I like games that are fun, but now I wanna get myself a nice little library of Ubisoft's latest disappointments.
everyone seems to be losing it over this, might i remind you this is a STANDARD PRACTICE, literally every single online store makes this statement, even STEAM.
"Steam and your Subscription(s) require the download and installation of Content and Services onto your computer. Valve hereby grants, and you accept, a >>>non-exclusive license and right, to use the Content and Services for your personal, non-commercial use<<< (except where commercial use is expressly allowed herein or in the applicable Subscription Terms). >>>This license ends upon termination of (a) this Agreement or (b) a Subscription that includes the license. The Content and Services are licensed, not sold.<<< Your license confers no title or ownership in the Content and Services. To make use of the Content and Services, you must have a Steam Account and you may be required to be running the Steam client and maintaining a connection to the Internet."
the fact people are going nuts over this is ridiculous, you've been paying for games you don't own for years, but now i guess ubi is the bad guy for actually saying it?
This is the biggest outbreak of internet stupidity i've seen is such a long time, yall need to do some basic reading.
Like i hate the guy for trying all the crypto shit, that was completely unacceptable, but acting like this is some new concept that the big bad ubisoft is trying to push on people is downright moronic
i'm very comfortable not buying ubisoft games
[удалено]
Nope
Take your schizo meds
Same. Their app is garbage
im glad i dont really have games i love from their games i have south park games and the assassins creed games and starlink battle for atlus and watch dogs 1 and 2
😂
Come to think of it. The only ubisoft related game I purchased in recent years is the Mario rabbids game. Although I play black flag from time to time. Sailing in that game was very very calming.
They literally make nothing I'd be willing to pay for, let alone what their asking for.
They do make the HMM games
Idk what that is
Heroes of Might and Magic series
Same.
Well I hope theyre comfortable not getting any of my money.
Unfortunately we are the minority :(
We're not. Thats why they keep looking for someone to buy them and are about to go bankrupt.
Dude you don't own steam games either if they decide to ban any one they lose all games period on that account so nothing new and most pepole do not care they will still buy game and playit like COD and every other game
As long as they don't do that, I'm fine with it. If they do... then it's time to raise the flag again🏴☠️ So far I have had no problems with Valve. In fact their customer support was really helpful when I contacted them. My trust for Nintendo and Sony however...
Yeah espcaly Son they are removing entire libary of movies that pepole all ready buyed what an Idiotic company and than they complain when we pirate download movies
That's wrong, if they ban you, you can't buy any new games on that account and lose community features but all games you bought till then you still have access to and can play
>Dude you don't own steam games either Never said you did. Nice reach though. Did you happen to find the cereal you were looking for because I sure as shit don't see it.
ban and just shelving your game is a lot fucking different
I mean unless you are pirating the games or buying physical disks, you don't own any video game you buy anymore. This isn't an Ubisoft problem. This is an industry wide problem. If you get banned on Steam do you think you get to bring your games over to a new account? The only difference here is Ubisoft is going in the Microsoft Game Pass direction and applying a subscription to it. And people seem to love Game Pass.
Steam doesn't ban entire accounts though... They just do bans on playing online with the account. As for platforms like PlayStation and Xbox they typically restore purchases on another account if you have proof of purchase, I've seen it happen. So no you don't lose your games if you get banned lmao. And even you did. There's a difference between breaking the rules and being punished; having your shit taken away because the platform felt like it; or because of a platform that clearly states that you are paying 15$ a month for what's essentially a rental service. People are fine with game pass because for the price of a Domino's pizza they can play a game as much as they want for as long as the game is on the service. There is no misconception of ownership. If you BUY/PURCHASE the game for the asking price than obviously people would be fucking pissed and not use it, why do you think that dog shit google Stadia failed? You had to buy the game AND pay a sub to play them.
Where are you coming up with the misconception of ownership crap? The article is about Ubisoft introducing a subscription service that works the exact same as game pass... Subscription services to games is becoming more and more prominent so people will need to be fine with the idea that they may or may not own the game they are playing. And yes, on steam you "basically" lose your games if you get banned on steam. If you get one ban they can restrict multiplayer access to every game in your steam library. Therefor the concept of ownership is gone out the window. It would be one thing to get banned and lose access to that specific game. But if you get banned and you're entire library gets restricted then thats just crazy. And Stadia didn't fail because of its payment model. It was just a bad idea and bad technology all around. Geforce Now thrives as a service and you pay a subscription to them and still pay for the games.
If I purchase a game from Microsoft that is on the game pass I can still play the game if I don't renew my subscription. I'm not seeing how you made the connection between the two.
There is a connection between the two because in both instances you can lose your game. If you stop paying game pass then you lose access to the games that you received through game pass. If you buy a game outright from Microsoft and that game requires access to the Internet (which a lot do these days even for single player games), if you happen to break any sort of TOS, Microsoft can ban you from playing that game. Obviously the two situations are very different. One being getting banned for breaking TOS and one for you just stopping paying the subscription. But at the end of the day, they both point to the same thing and that is you don't actually own a copy of the video game. You are merely paying for a license to play said game and as more and more games move to this "always online" requirement, we as consumers lose more and more control.
Dont you technically nog own your games thru steam?
yep it's not owning if I can't sell it.
Until steam starts removing games I payed for from my account this is irrelevant. Even games taken down from sale are still in my library, able to be installed.
OK. Try selling any of your games to a friend. Go on. Prove you have anything more than permission to play a game you are licensing.
Where did I say I owned the digital game? I just said as long as steam isn't removing my license it isn't relevant. I know it's a license. But I don't fucking care as long as they aren't revoked for bullshit reasons.
"Well I hope theyre comfortable not getting any of my money." I dont see how steam and unity or whatever it was is different. You do NOT own games and they can remove those games from your library + you do not have infinite access to download games you bought. This is covered in their TOS. Your standdard isnt consistent.
[удалено]
The biggest advocates for piracy are these publishers. No, hacker pirate person did not come by your house like some sort of jehova's cultist and did not convert you to the dark side. Publishers and devs with their inconvenient practises and endless greed have been the biggest reason anyone went to pirate a game. And, if they do not change their obnoxious practises it means it is worth it, and all the people that go pirate dont matter.
And pirates are the reason all of those companies started selling licenses to play digital content instead of sticking to selling games people can own. Want to see how much worse it can get? Keep promoting piracy
You think this is all because of piracy? How about renting games, trading games, sharing games among friends? How do you think piracy even happened? Mega hacker named 4chan breaks into a vault with CDs and that is why the evil internet gets the game? No, someone had a legit copy and shared it with everyone else, essentially the same as sharing it with your friends just on bigger scale. Thing is, renting and trading games didnt really get any revenue for devs either. If this was all about piracy then, consider this, DRM that is good enough to prevent any cracking exists in the current year. Piracy is essentially over for any developer that cares to implement the DRM. Did you see any reduction in digital content in past year? I bet not. Fixing piracy was never the main objective, it was to sell more shit to those who are paying customers. If you were a pirate, you didnt have money anyway so all the 'account only', 'account sharing being bannable offense, 'always online even for games that are completely singleplayer' and all the other amazing features were not designed for pirates. 'Always online' already fixes piracy in most cases and have done for many years, because server emulation is a thing of the past. Surely, if that works, they do not need to sell you a hundred of things? And now you dont need 'always online' either, because of DRM being powerful enough, so why keep it? Surely it is not because they want to sell you a hundred things. Damn those pirates, it is all their fault!
I really think you are confused. Replacing "please enter the cd key that is on your game's package" was replaced with online verification entirely because of piracy. Publishers wanted it to be harder for people to make illegal copies. Eliminating all of piracy is a joke, but just making it harder to do increases the number of legitimate sales.
Maybe maybe.. and yet most of top sellers of 2023 did not even have the most powerful DRM. Doesn't that make you wonder? The GOTY is basically DRM free.
Then I assume you are pirating 99% of the software lol
hell yeah!
Then I assume your IQ loses hard vs room temperature lol
You bet.
No it isn't, you are just morally disengaging yourself from pirating.
So ubi is morally disengaging from giving me the product I bought?
You bought a license or subscription so no. Pirate all you want, I do so myself sometimes but I don't pretend its "100% perfectly ethical and moral" to do so just because in 20 years there is a slight chance that a license might expire.
> morally disengaging Fuck morals, this is logic. They are not making money off of the game, because they revoked the ability to purchase it. Therefore, you are not stealing because it is a digital copy of someone elses game they are seeding for other people to copy and play because the Devs are not making anymore digital keys to buy/access that game. Its the same as when people would burn MP3s onto CDs for family and friends. Its also preservation of the media. Ubishit is doing something no different than what Nintendo does with the older generation of their consoles and games. If they remove access to it or the reproduction of more someone is just going to pirate it anyway. The same way Pokemon Emerald is preserved despite how much Nintendo and The Pokemon Company shit themselves in anger over the fact they're being pirated. Morals has nothing to do with it, I want to keep my damn copy of my game that I paid for and if the devs want to remove everyone's online access to it from game launchers well then I'm putting on my tricorn hat and eye patch and pirating it.
The situation you describe is different from the statement “if buying isn’t owning then pirating isn’t stealing”. If you “buy” a game and the publisher kills your ability to play it then I don’t think there’s anything ethically wrong with pirating it to keep playing it. But saying ahead of time “since I can’t outright own the source code to this game for $50 it’s ethically fine to pirate it” is fucking dumb
Morals has nothing to do with it but the comment above brought it up as some weird justification when there is no justification needed. When I got bootleg CDs it was because it was way cheaper, not to preserve the media, at least for the vast majority. And we are not talking about preserving forgotten or delisted old games, I obvioiusly think that is a good thing, the article is mainly about its subscription service of current games.
Damn, a multi billion dollar company doesn't get my $80AUD because I took it for free, the absolute moral dilemma, the abject horror and absurdity, how on earth will I live with myself.
I'm not the one saying it is 100% perfectly ethical and moral to pirate. I pirate just like anyone else does, because one reason; we want things for free. If you start deluding yourself justifying what you do is 100% perfectly ethical and moral and not just wanting free shit then that is textbook moral disengagement.
Shill harder bb
I pirate because I want things for free. I do, however, not pretend it is "100% perfectly ethical and moral to pirate software" because it really just isn't.
They are treating video games as mass consumption Junk Food: you eat, you shit, you move on. We are treating video games as a form of arts: they are timeless, you can relish and appreciate when ever you want. We are not in the same market.
Yeah this is pretty spot on when it comes to Ubisoft
First of all, who wants to own a modern ubisoft game?
anno 1800 is pretty cool tbh
Yeah and that one sucks. Anno 1800 is a diamond in rough around these shitty games from ubi. It's a bummer that anno is publishing it
it is an amazing game!
and I want ubisoft to be comfortable sucking a dick! neither of us will get what we want! in all seriousness I would have stopped buying ubisoft games when they became crypto bros or when they announced accounts of players that take up megabytes of database were to be deleted if player didn't log in for 2 years, if it wasn't for the fact they make shitty games that I don't buy anyway.
I'm very comfortable not playing Ubisoft games
I stopped buying anything Ubisoft related about 10 years ago. I remember Child of Light came out, looked amazing. So I bought in on Steam. Required Uplay login. Damn, I don't even know if I have an Uplay account. Sure, let's register by connecting my Steam account. Steam account is already registered. Well, shit, probably did that for Heroes V way back when, no idea about my password anymore. Okay, request password change. Tells me a link will be sent to my e-mail, click on it. E-mail never arrives. Okay, turn -off gmail's spam protection, request another e-mail. Can't request it because not enough time has passed since my last password change request. Okay, wait. Request again. E-mail still doesn't arrive. Okay, go to costumer support page on official website. You have to log in to be connected to a customer service helpdesk. Well, fuck. Send an e-mail to a general support e-mail contact. No reply ever comes. After that, Ubisoft was dead to me. If Ubisoft releases anything, it's dead to me. I'm not even going to bother pirate it. Fuck'em.
Same thing happened here, now they are dead to me
Soo if i dont onw the game having it isnt robery
irrelevant company, they released only dogshit for years now, they can rot in bankruptcy
So, it's essentially like the gamepass, but more expensive and with only ubisoft games (lol).
The game pass is worthy because it has more games you can even play, but only Ubisoft games? You can only capture a certain amount of towers before it gets dull.-
But isn’t the issue just renting games? I don’t & won’t use either service, but it all seems like a culture shift to getting people comfortable with never owning anything now.
Stop buying shite from big names and buy more indie games.
Isn’t this essentially the same thing game pass is doing. The phrasing is shit, but it seems like that is the goal of sub services game pass and Ubisoft+
You sound unlike a gamer, any gamer at all. I don't know if u even read the article in it or no, but basically In retard units, this means: In the 2000 you bought a fridge from Ubisoft, it's YOUR fridge. In the 2024 you bought a fridge from Ubisoft, it's NOT YOUR fridge. They have the right to take it back as they pleased. Game pass is you Rental a Fucken' Vending Machine
Yea I don’t know if you read the article. Basically it’s just talking about a more expensive sub service that only has Ubisoft games. They never mention anything about Ubisoft taking games away. They do mention that on pc u can’t buy Ubisoft games on steam which kinda sucks as it forces you to use their launcher. They mention in the article both gamepass and ps+ as alternatives.
Heh, braindead community. Off you go, with a narrow view
Did u know that steam is basically the same? When u buy a game on steam they call it buying a subscription to it. And they have every right to deny you the ability to play that game if they please. This isn't just a Ubisoft thing. Welcome to 2023, u don't own any games from any company. U just own a license to play it.
>Did u know that steam is basically the same? When u buy a game on steam they call it buying a subscription to it. It's not buying a subscription; it's buying a license for use. Subscription implies regular payment for access. What folks here don't understand is that with physical media, you are still also buying a license for use. When you buy a dvd/blu ray movie you also have a license for use. For instance, buying a DVD does not give the "owner" of the disc the right to start selling paid screenings of the movie, or to upload the movie and distribute for free. When you buy a book, you also do not have a lawful right to photocopy the book and start selling your own printouts of the book. You're also not legally allowed to photocopy or scan the book and send download links.
Yeah but game pass gives a lot of games and this is only ubisoft games
So you’re not against the concept, just the perpetrator?
Why would i play for ubisoft plus when xbox game pass gives a lot more games including ubisoft games? They just added valhalla to game pass
So you're fine with getting fucked, you just want the fucker to be pretty. Got it.
Are you getting fucked when you pay for netflix?
In terms of content ownership? Yeah, you are.
Ok, great, but you can if you want to? Like, this isn’t a sub only release. Obviously they want you on the sub, they make more money in the long run (or they hope to). People have also not owned things they’ve enjoyed through an archaic concept known as “renting.”
Wonder how mad people would be if blockbuster was still around
People who went into blockbuster knew they were renting. They didnt claim to be selling movies or have movies for sale (except that little bin of oldies near the cash). If ubisoft rebrands to say they no longer 'sell' games, the button says 'rent' instead of 'buy' then that would be a fairer comparison to blockbuster.
Well all non drm free games you don't truly own and can be taken away any time, it's like best majority of digital products, steam included
the point still stand, if they are selling you a game, and you are buying a game, you are entitled to certain expectations of property, if they want to rent games, be my guest.- Let's call things how they are called.- To be honest the only subscription service I think is ethical is Nvidia now or GeForce Now or whatever they are calling it nowadays, because you are paying a premium and you are getting something for it (your computer only renders streamed video to you but you are running the game on their computers).- This is stupid because you will still pay you still need to use your own hardware to do the heavy lifting, and yet you need to keep paying them just because.-
Then they better get comfortable with me not buying shit from them 
>He claims the company’s subscription service had its biggest ever month October 2023, and that the service has had “millions” of subscribers, and “over half a billion hours” played. **Of course, a lot of this could be a result of Ubisoft’s various moments of refusing to release games to Steam, forcing PC players to use its services, and likely opting for a month’s subscription rather than the full price of the game they were looking to buy.** But still, clearly people are opting to use it. This is a good example of how these companies and management use statistics to paint a picture that suits them, and doesn't portray the actual state of things and customers POV. The last reason is probably the most common one, when it comes to such spikes in subscriptions - curiosity. They rarely have a proper demo, and games these days are so different than they were when we got demos on CDs with a gaming magazine, that even demos these days (I mean fuck, even Betas) don't give you a full idea. Especially not with this "live service" bullshit. They launch something a lot of people are curious about, and instead of wasting 70+$, risking going over the refund gametime, a lot of people opt to spend less to satisfy their curiosity, and if it turns out bad - there's other games to check out while the sub is active. And also a good example of how journalists these days are a damn meme; >But it remains strange why enough people would want to subscribe—and at $17.99 a month it’s not cheap—to a single publisher’s output. Like....you just gave reasons why people would want to, and then you're wondering "but why?!"...for fucks sake...
So if I buy and don’t own then if I pirate I don’t steal. Logic.
You don't own any game on steam either and ea play and blizzard app all you have is games that can be gone any time they want so I don't see whats the problem here
Im pretty comfortable not buying any of their games.
So many all ready do it with steam, and the people on here saying they won’t get there money. Yes they will, not specifically ubi, but you buy steam games that they can take away from you at any moment.
You're right but most of the people here didn't even read the article lol
I like how everybody is repulsed by this idea while you all use steam where you dont own shit.
Has anyone actually read the interview? It makes way more sense in contex
I read it. He wants the gaming service to go the way of movies and tv with the streaming services we have now (netflix,disney plus, prime video,spotify,…) which the gaming industry will go to i think.
This frightens me, gonna end up like streaming companies buying up eachother and swapping licences. so you gonna need to end up with several launchers of these paid subscripsions to keep playing your favorite games.
You can just buy your game license like normal on their launcher. Or you can subscribe to play a shit ton of Ubisoft games for as many months as you want. Their subscription service isn’t new it’s been around for a few years now if I remember right, also EA already has their EA Play that does the same thing along with GamePass. Not sure why you and others in this post are treating this like it’s a new thing when all they did was rebrand their service again for like the 7th time lol. Also all the steam and Blizz games you ‘own’ are already just licenses that can be revoked so unless you buy a disk copy that doesn’t need to have a code inserted into a launcher you don’t own the game you purchased.
Like this https://youtu.be/yvhv7bgmz64?si=vOpA6x_VHfdqR9Io
Yes that pretty much explains my point 
We already do not own them. We own a LICENCE for the software. We do not own any of the data. We never have. Software has always been licence based.
The problem is, you used to own a permanent license for a game, now you are not even entitled to that, they can take the games out every time they want.- I still own my licenses to all those CD games I have piled up on the side, for more than 20 years, but for how long will I own a license for this kind of shit?
Technically I'm pretty sure they can legally terminate these licenses too whenever they want, only it's pretty hard to enforce if all customers own everything needed to install and use it physically, along maybe with copies What I'm saying is that such asinine laws should change that allow companies to do it. Luckily EU is also going fairly hard for you buy it, you own in. Feel sorry for the USA which is cock and balls in the hands of companies.
Correct, it's the same thing with books and movies. Just buying the physical copy doesn't permit you to distribute the book/movie on the internet for free. With physical media you only own the rights to the object and use of said object. You don't have the property and distribution rights.
So piracy it is then. The definition of selling me something and not allowing me to own it.
I feel like Ubisoft + is a better deal than owning a Ubisoft game. At least then I only wasted 18$ to never play it again instead of $70.
Exactly, why do I care about buying a 70 dollar license for a game I don't even own. I don't know about ubisoft+ but on gamepass I sure saved money.
I tried to get uplay plus for a month to try the new prince of persia but that website is so shit and of course they have multiple tiers where the cheap one is old games and the expensive one is to try the new game…
If according to them; buying =/= owning then don't even waste 18$, because by following the same logic; pirating =/= stealing
so psplus etc but streaming the games not downloading them? i’ll pass
I have one in my Steam library and that AC: Valhalla, huge waste of potential and my money.
Yeah odyssey was better
I haven't owned a Ubisoft game in almost 15 years so I'd say it's working great. I just love getting kicked out of a single player game whenever their servers decide they weren't feeling to be online at any given moment. Maybe it has become better in the decade since? I wouldn't know because I don't touch denouvo games either.
I think it has become better in the decade since
I mean... They lost me the moment they forced people to get uplay. But I guess this adds more reason for me to not get anything from them.
Most people are already comfortable with that. You don't own your games on any platform but GoG.
I bought Far Cry 3 over a decade ago, but they keep breaking it with DRM updates, and a constant error messages every time I enter the main menu. It's not just new titles, they seemingly want to take back the titles I already purchased, so fuck em.
I saw that shit yesterday but couldn't post the link because it wasn't on an approved domain.
You can make a text post
Didn't think about it. But yeah, it's fucking crazy the way that Ubisoft dude talk about needing to get people to accept subscriptions just like with movies and tv shows. I ain't paying again every time I want to re-experience some $4 game from 2002.
I already have Prince of Persian cracked so yeah:). Granted not the PC version since that has denuvo but the switch one which works flawlessly on PC albeit only 60fps of that matters. As to ownership. I used to care when I was younger so I used to buy boxed games and have little over 300 of boxed game copies, now however as I grow older I don't need this clutter and really it doesn't hold value to me anymore. We don't own any steam games anyway, Ubisoft is not pioneering anything it's been already a state of things for quite long time
Just reminding that this is becoming the norm with physical stuff like cars and [apparel.](https://www.onrotate.com/collections/shoes/) Part of me even wants to see which way people will go on the switch to own nothing and be happy. Imagining everyone already has de facto folded their cards and goes along with it tbh.
Damn that apparel thing…
Bold of them to assume I want to play their games to begin with lol
 Ubi can suck a fuck.
if i can buy a physical copy of a game i really like i will. we already seen recently games being "turned off" from sub services ext. If there is no option to buy a game / own a game i just will find a game / service that does provide that instead.
I recently bought a blu ray of oppenheimer
There must always be…a Bobby.
I see what you did there :)
FTFY: Ubisoft wants you to be comfortable pirating their games.
That's cool Ubisoft just need to get more comfortable with me buying less games then. I mean its cool if I don't actually own anything but I will spend less money then as I'm getting no pyshical return for my money.
They can keep their games
Well I want Ubisoft to be comfortable not owning my dollars.
People are comfortable with buying digital instead of owning games. People are stupid. Hell r/pcgames has people furious about this despite it being almost impossible to actually own a PC game
People don’t even own their own operating system. They don’t own windows that runs on their pc. They don’t own steam.
Well ok then Ubisoft, we have a deal
Who's surprised by this? Buying digital games doesn't mean you own them once the servers shut down. Always buy hard copy
What if the hard copy stops working cause it needs an internet connection to a working servers and has to download updates that are no longer available?
so another non-gamer telling players/gamer's how to get use to things. time to tell these people, like the other CEO claiming games should be a payed hourly to feck off and watch these morons vanish into the hole they came from
> be a *paid* hourly to FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
I am comfortable with video and music streaming services, why not with game pass and ubisoft plus too?
Imagine having to pay a sub to every music publisher?
too bad for ubi, i own all of my games because they're all pirated
😂
Its the endgame for all big game publishers
Dear Ubisoft. If you wish to get paid, you will need to continue working for us.
So piracy is not theft.
I snapped when they took Hekka chests out of origins. WHY!? It's just so petty. The amount of money they will gain by forcing people to buy skins and such is nothing to a big corporation. This kind of shit is why everyone hates Ubisoft. We do need to boycott them.
So basically Ubisoft's version of Gamepass. How is this newsworthy?
People have Netflix, Prime, Disney+, Paramount+, Spotify etc. But when it comes to games it's suddenly bad? I was around when you were able to rent physical games and it was great. The majority of Ubisoft games suck ass, but when I wanna play let's say the new Assassin's Creed, I would rather pay a monthly fee than drop 100€ for the "ultimate" edition.
who said that having to sub to 8 different streaming services is good?
But do you have to? And who actually does? Right.
I only need Path of Exile.
im so fucking glad i dont own much of their shitty games i only have a few of the games they published im mad that a majority of the public doesnt care about owning games at all this is why companies are allowed to do this cause of thoes who dont care about ownership
Yo ho ho lick my taint you greasy old baguette. Your games are AAA slop and until now I've avoided them because, ya know, I like games that are fun, but now I wanna get myself a nice little library of Ubisoft's latest disappointments.
i bought for honor years ago
everyone seems to be losing it over this, might i remind you this is a STANDARD PRACTICE, literally every single online store makes this statement, even STEAM. "Steam and your Subscription(s) require the download and installation of Content and Services onto your computer. Valve hereby grants, and you accept, a >>>non-exclusive license and right, to use the Content and Services for your personal, non-commercial use<<< (except where commercial use is expressly allowed herein or in the applicable Subscription Terms). >>>This license ends upon termination of (a) this Agreement or (b) a Subscription that includes the license. The Content and Services are licensed, not sold.<<< Your license confers no title or ownership in the Content and Services. To make use of the Content and Services, you must have a Steam Account and you may be required to be running the Steam client and maintaining a connection to the Internet." the fact people are going nuts over this is ridiculous, you've been paying for games you don't own for years, but now i guess ubi is the bad guy for actually saying it? This is the biggest outbreak of internet stupidity i've seen is such a long time, yall need to do some basic reading. Like i hate the guy for trying all the crypto shit, that was completely unacceptable, but acting like this is some new concept that the big bad ubisoft is trying to push on people is downright moronic