The DRM Chronicles: Ubisoft

If you're a gamer and haven't been living under a rock, you've probably at least heard of the DRM scheme that Ubisoft has been pushing for their PC games, implemented in Silent Hunter 5 and Assassin's Creed 2.  This system requires that anyone trying to play the game have a constant internet connection. If the game loses its connection to the Ubisoft DRM servers, then you can't play until the connection is restored.

There was of course a bit old internet uproar, but apparently it didn't affect sales enough to convince Ubisoft that this is a stupid idea; they used the same DRM in H.A.W.X. 2, and it isn't clear yet whether that idiocy will continue into the recently announced Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood on PC.

Now, I have a pretty good internet connection at home; fast enough (for the area), and quite stable.  Still, something makes me balk at having to be connected all the time to play a single-player game, at having the game constantly phoning home on me.  Also, I do some gaming on a laptop with mobile broadband, as well, and that's significantly less reliable.  Getting disconnected, and potentially losing progress, would be a huge pain in the ass.

So, I avoid the games that have this DRM entirely.  No, I'm not advocating piracy--I just find other things to occupy my time and, more importantly for Ubisoft, spend my money on.  Since they insist on treating me, a paying customer, like a pirate, then I'll ignore them.

And here's the punchline: Those who do download unauthorized, cracked copies of the games (and they were cracked, regardless of claims of the DRM's infallibility), got a superior product.  They don't have to suffer interruptions because their internet connection dropped.  There's something very, very wrong with that picture.

It's probably impossible to know how many would-be pirates bought the game because of this DRM, and how many would-be customers it encouraged to turn to piracy.  However, if responses on various websites are any gauge, the latter are more numerous by far, as are those who simply didn't purchase the game--or waited for its price to drop significantly.  Surely this means less in profits than more friendly DRM schemes (disc checks don't seem nearly so onerous now, and Steam is the shining example often held aloft).

Regardless, congratulations may be in order.  Ubisoft's DRM scheme has definitely earned the descriptor "Draconian."  I wouldn't be surprised if some years down the line this example were held up as one of the worst offenders--and hopefully, the one that showed such schemes don't pay off.  But who knows how big company execs' minds work.