Ubi DRM Prevents Hardware Changes

[Anonymous]

An article was recently posted by the guys at Guru3D, explaining the latest problem with online activation of Ubisoft titles:

We already know that you can only activate the game on 3 different systems, but now it turns out that this affects hardware changes as well.

What the Guru guys did was perform a performance test of Anno 2070. After testing it on a particular rig with a particular setup, they wanted to change the graphics cards to compare the performance. That's when things started to go wrong ...

"For the NVIDIA setup I take out the GTX 580, and insert a GTX 590. When I now startup the game 'BAM', again an activation is required. Once again I fill out the key and now Ubisoft is thanking me with the message that I ran out of activations.
Here's what Ubisofts DRM is doing these days, they don't just verify the number of PCs you work on, nope ... they monitor hardware changes. So once we inserted that GeForce GTX 590 the hardware id # changed rendering our activation invalid."

Ubisoft do of course have a 'solution' to this: "simply" e-mail their support and ask them to reset the activations. I feel, however, that this falls under the category of making things more difficult for the customer than they need to be - yet another piece of evidence that Ubisoft's draconian methods are becoming too much for even themselves to handle.

P.S: I should specify that Heroes VI does not use the DRM used by Anno 2070.

If you would like to take a look at the original page visit this link:
https://www.celestialheavens.com/1326537538

[Pol]

Funny as I was forced to replace my faulty card (HD5750) just a few minutes ago. Anyway no problem, as my replacement is much weaker(HD4350). Thus I'm relieved from playing the game at all.

More time for waiting on future patches I guess.

BTW Isn't that called "Hasten approach"?
(In other words company manager having nill qualification in the subject but decided to doing so "as bad decision is always better than no decision" - Tomorrow's classic which is in - customer pays for it. )

[klaymen]

I shall print this info on a paper, pack a brick into it and when some CEO or PR manager starts spouting the usual stuff about piracy causing low sales, or that DRM is effective against piracy, I'll make his/her nose meet this info (with the brick). Repeatedly. Until he/she or gets it or until unconsciousness, whichever comes first.

[CloudRiderX]

Seems really underhanded.

[Bandobras Took]

Okay, now this is legitimate idiocy to complain about.

[Mozared]

And then to think that a pirated version of Anno 2070 doesn't suffer from this bull****, you can play it with their servers offline and the only big thing you miss out on is multiplayer. Is it any wonder piracy is so big?

[mr.hackcrag]

I think UBI should read this:

http://www.geekwire.com/2011/experiment ... abe-newell

[Kalah]

Indeed!

"One thing that we have learned is that piracy is not a pricing issue. It’s a service issue. The easiest way to stop piracy is not by putting antipiracy technology to work. It’s by giving those people a service that’s better than what they’re receiving from the pirates."

[Rosensmart]

The problem is the same with the "Bloodbowl" games.... I wrote a mail to Ubi, and recived what i needed to reactivate the game.

[ThunderTitan]

Hardware changes requiring a new activation was old news years ago back when EA or whoever first started doing activations...

[ShadowLiberal]

Given Ubisoft's history of poorly thought out DRM it's not too surprising that they'd screw up like this.

I mean come on, Ubisoft purposely put a bug in Assassin's Creed to catch a company in the act of letting one of their employees pirate the game, and then sued the company not just for piracy, but for harming their reputation. How did they harm their reputation? Because of all the bad publicity the pirated version of their game got because the bug Ubisoft purposely put in it made it unplayable like 10 or 15 minutes into it.

Really, if you want to catch a company red handed for allowing one of their employees to post a pirated version of your game online weeks before it's official release then there's much better ways to mark where the game came from.

[Mozared]

After every Ubisoft release I feel like they've got this brilliant creative team developing games, but they have either retarded CEO's or a really lazy programming team. Possibly both. Their outlook on piracy+their means of distribution and the amount of bugs in ALL of their releases are both ridiculous.



It's such a shame, really - Ubisoft is one of the few companies that still releases games that (aside from the DRM bull**** and bugs) meet certain standards that, while just south of the Portal/Mass Effect league, still beat everything else on the market.

[ThunderTitan]

And of course the pirated version doesn't have that problem...

[hellegennes]

@Mozared:



All CEOs are retarded. Why do you think AOL Time Warner lost 300 billion dollars in a little less than a decade?

[klaymen]

And of course the pirated version doesn't have that problem...

Honest cusomer gets screwed over and over, "filthy pirate" plays without many such obstacles.
Ironic, isn't it?

[ThunderTitan]

It's only ironic if it's unexpected...

[Thelonious]

So basicly, without a DRM we'd be better off? (I know that's a tricky question - but still)

[ThunderTitan]

Works fine for people that have the DRM-less version...

[klaymen]

It's only ironic if it's unexpected...

That might be a problem, because only the Spanish Inquisition is unexpected.

[Kalah]

Actually, the Spanish inquisition was always expected because they alerted people before arriving, giving them a chance to prep. But I also prefer the Monty version.