Steam Summer Sale Sullied by Ubisoft’s DRM Scheme

If you bought an Ubisoft game available as part of Steam's massive Summer Sale, you may experience what users are feeling right about now: angst and rage. Apparently some players who bought Ubisoft games have found that they cannot play them because of uPlay, the online service in charge of validating DRM in many of Ubisoft's titles.

But this isn't just isolated to Steam users with Ubisoft games – apparently the service is down for everyone – and because Ubisoft's DRM requires online verification, no one can play any games. The service was down on Sunday and judging by the 23+ pages of complaints on the Ubisoft forums, the problem has not been fixed as of this writing.

We'll update this story as more information becomes available, but ultimately this story is just another validation of the fact that online-dependent DRM schemes are bad for everyone involved. Thanks to Andrew Eisen for the tip.

Source: Kotaku

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone


  1. 0
    Prof_Sarcastic says:

    The amount of circular argument is getting a bit silly now.  I'll say it again.  I need it *** I F *** I wish to enjoy my hobby with my wife.  There's a qualifier in there, I'm not sure if you misread it, misunderstood it, or just have an axe to grind.

    I said nothing with my money.  Anyone's entitled to infer their own meaning from my actions, and I'm well aware the company will probably think that my actions say "I'm OK with this".  The fact that you're both completely wrong about whether I'm OK with it doesn't change the effect those actions have, which would be a fair point if that was the one you were making.

    I really don't understand how anyone could read my posts here and think that I'm even remotely OK with it, or that I "don't mind the abuse".  If I was OK with it would I be complaining so much?  That's flat-out absurd – anyone who honestly thinks that is a brain donor, and if you're just being hyperbolic, like with this bizarre "Russian roulette" analogy, then you can give it a rest.

    Obviously I did agree to the DRM.  Does that mean I agreed to shoddy treatment?  It would be idiocy to suggest such a thing.

    Yet again, there is still no explanation as to why I should be blamed for someone failing to provide a good quality service that I paid money for.  And there's a good reason why you haven't answered that question: I shouldn't be blamed for it.

  2. 0
    GrimCW says:

    because you said with your money "I'm cool with this!" and got it regardless.

    you did not "need" it no matter how much you think you did, and your wives reluctance to get something else is not an excuse. you willingly paid the price, and accepted the license, you spoke with your wallet and the company hears it loud and clear.  to them you clearly do not mind the abuse or you would've gone elsewhere.

    once put to the test you caved and bought in, you knew the risk, you knew the issues it can and will have, and you accepted that.  You willingly just joined a game of Russian roulette. you accepted the consequences for losing at the door, and thus its your fault for joining in the first place. The rules were all there in plain black and white before you when you put the money down and later clicked "I Agree". Don't deny your own fault in accepting the fate you chose.

  3. 0
    Prof_Sarcastic says:

    I didn't choose or even want to buy this game, for the same reason that I didn't buy StarCraft II.  My wife however had no interest in finding a different and better game, however hard I tried.  If I wanted to engage in my favorite hobby with the company of a loved one, yes I did in fact NEED to buy this.  I guess most people don't have such a robust excuse, but why bring "need" into it at all?  We "need" NOTHING except basic food and shelter.  For most people it would be a matter of how much you want it.

    Perhaps you think that putting up with something that's shit because the alternative is even less appealing is the same as "being okay with it".  That's fair enough, I merely wish to point out that I completely disagree.

    And yes, the company who got my money are likely to see it the same way you did.  I'm well aware that my buying this game gives funding to people who are pushing the very schemes I hate, and that money speaks louder than words, but words are better than nothing.  So I speak up even (especially!) when people try to infer that I have no right to complain.

    But still, none of this back and forth answers the question: why is it MY fault that THEY didn't provide a good enough service that I paid for?

    (After all, if DRM was flawless, who would still have an issue with it?)

  4. 0
    GrimCW says:

    thats easy.

    you should've found a different and better game without the always on DRM to play together. reason being a simple fact that your purchase shows that your okay with this bad DRM and its affects, including unannounced downtime. sales speak louder than any words could to companies, and you said "hey, i'm okay with this simply because my wife wanted to play it" there was no "need" for that game in particular, of the hundreds of others available, you chose that one.

    to sum it up further. you chose to pay for the DRM, you chose to accept the DRM's flaws knowingly (all info is up front in the EULA and for some on the package.) and show the  companies your alright with that.

  5. 0
    Thipp says:

    It is a shame because Ubisoft puts out some good games but they don't receive a penny for them from me. Any game with an always online DRM system has a nice "Free" price tag on it courtesy of the internet. 

  6. 0
    Conster says:

    This is beginning to sound an awful lot like the way people responded when hackers interfered with paying customers' ability to play Assassin's Creed II. And that is not a good thing.

  7. 0
    Prof_Sarcastic says:

    Against my better judgement, I bought Diablo 3 because my wife wanted to play with me (oo-er).  Forgive me if my desire to spend time with my wife trumped my principles against stupid DRM schemes.

    Now, explain to me how it's MY fault when the product I paid for is unplayable?

  8. 0
    GrimCW says:

    it isn't an always on DRM anymore… and hasn't been for nearly a year or more now.

    Now look down, see that foot, insert in mouth.

    it does require an online authentication for the first time up, and it tries to validate each launch. Like steam it has an offline mode though.

    the issue wasn't that however, the issue was it had prevented new players from activating their new games, and old players that had botched their login info from going into offline mode.

    both of these issues can happen on steam as well, and the offline mode/login info is actually fairly common there too.

  9. 0
    DorkmasterFlek says:

    When will people learn?  Don't fucking buy games with always online DRM bullshit.  You get fucked, you have only yourselves to blame.  Personally, if I was Valve, I would be disallowing extraneous publisher DRM other than Steamworks, but maybe that's a bad business decision for them.  It would be great for the users though.

  10. 0
    GrimCW says:

    if UPlay is down, it will lock out certain content, and access to other UPlay related things. Can also prevent gaining of the Uplay achievements which actually = into points to get stuff unlike the otherwise useless gamerscores and crap of many other platforms.

    not nearly as bad as its lockout of the game on the PC end, or Mass Effect 2, 3, and Dragon Age lockouts where it'll ban access to all DLC until a connection is made.

    so yeah its console part is better, but not without flaw. And i've said it before, so i'll repeat it again, Ubi WANTS PC gamers to be angry, they don't want the PC market to win because they feel powerless here. They've shown this repeatedly in the past with various actions and comments, including the now famous "95% of PC gamers are pirates" comment.

    they clearly feel safer on the consoles, and even think PC development is so easy it can be done in 3 months by a 12 person team when porting.. yeah GRFS works rather well doesn't it? delayed, and still busted.. then agian this is the same company that thought 12 months for a from scratch PC game would work too.. nope.. busted, bad, and worthless.

  11. 0
    djnforce9 says:

    Fortunately, I'm not playing any UbiSoft titles at the moment or else I'd likely be faced with this as well. I have some of the games with the stupid DRM scheme since I wanted to play them and pretty much swallowed the bitter pill for the newest Prince of Persia and Assassin's Creed 2.

    I don't know why it's needed at this point. Those games are long past their prime time for sales. Why the strong protection? I hope it gets patched out (now would be a better time than ever).

Leave a Reply