homepage Forums Technology Copy Protection & DRM DRM Discussion: Silent Hunter 5 and Ubisoft's UPlay

Please discuss DRM and Ubisoft's UPlay here.

This thread was originally the articles feedback thread for Tom Cofield's Preview:
http://www.simhq.com/_naval/naval_035a.html

A couple of Google links to multiple articles on Ubisoft's new UPlay DRM methodology which requires fulltime connection:

http://www.google.com/search?q=ubisoft%2...g.mozilla:en-US

http://www.google.at/search?hl=de&sa...p;aq=f&oq=

Thanks for that preview, very interesting. If it just wasn't for that DRM...

Have to agree, the DRM is keeping me on the fence right now.

Yeah,
the drm is a buster for me.
I still play SH3 and I am certain UBI will drop support for this sim a few years down the road.
Try playing IL2 at UBI right now...
Plus having my saved game files hosted on a UBI server? What are they thinking? I back my stuff up and I would bet that they will have a server snafu and than "welp, sorry about yer saves, lol"
Stuff happens ya know deal with it!

I simply dont trust UBI based on there previous history of selling it's customers short like they did with that bug fest SH4.
If not for the modders that game would have dies a horrible death.

Great preview. Sub sims appeal to that hunter/killer instinct that I often associate with helo sims. The DRM might be a big problem for me though. Too often I'm on the road at some craptastic FBO in the middle of the night sitting outside the locked doors with no internet connection. And that's too bad because Silent Hunter type games are perfect for the laptop..no need to have a HOTAS and Track IR and all that jazz.. Hopefully UBI will see the light and allow for offline play...

Nice job on the write-up..

BeachAV8R

I liked the detailed preview, but IMHO if you are talking about a new, deal-breaking DRM, you could do well to include some details of it directly in the text and not just some links.

Don't expect people to figure out themself what happens if they lose internet connection during gameplay, or if they can not get a connection at all. Most will not research this and simple buy the game, to be angry later. So any article explaining the virtues of the new SH5 should also in the same detail explore the negatives in same detail, and that means a clear spelling out that without internet connection, with unreliable connection or with any problems at UBIs side this game will be worthless.

I respectfully disagree. The article is about the game.

On other hand, there could be a link to another one completely on the DRM, or to the countless thread in the Forums regarding that.

The article is a preview. Not an exhaustive look at the game. Nor is it an exhaustive look at DRM - I think we already have a forum for that. I'd rather not muddy up reviews and previews with lengthy discussions of the DRM. I think TC pointed out, in a paragraph, that it was an issue and invited the readers to other places (both the Subsim forum and our own DRM forum) to discuss it.

Sorry guys, but what is this going to accomplish?

TC pointed out the highlights and reasons to buy the game in nice detail. On two and a half pages with mouth watering screenshots.

The negatives - and they are LARGE negatives - do get summed up in a single paragraph without substantial information and two links to other discussion forums. Which many people won't bother to click or read trough.

What does this mean for average Joe Blow reader? He will see three pages of "must have game" and not bother to find out what pitfalls he's buying into with his 50USD. UBI sells a copy, the DRM becomes a success, we all rent our games in the future.

IMHO, SimHQ has a duty to fulfill as one of the largest simulation websites to warn of the potential problems with such new DRM systems. Simulations more than anything else have a long lifespan where these things could become a factor. So if you are helping promote a sim while glossing over the unfriendly details of it's DRM, you are helping promote this DRM concept. Which might have a negative impact for the entire simulation community, long-term.

Beach, just because we have a forum doesn't mean people make the effort to inform themself there. People need to BE informed so they can make an informed decision if they want to support such DRM systems with their money or not. They can not get a refund later on when they find out the game kicks them for a failed internet connection.

BTW, I would revoke my criticism if the link in that paragraph was to a direct simHQ forum topic on the specific problems with UBI's model, and if at least it was mentioned in ONE sentence that this game requires a constant net connection. This would directly inform people on what they are buying here, rather than just telling them "there's some sort of bad DRM on this title, but if you want to know more, you have to follow externals links and read trough 100 pages..."

Thanks so much! Very interesting. I probably won't buy 'cause I don't want cussing(it's in the rating).

That will be more for the review. I didn't want to make this a hit piece on the DRM software.

I agree with others that I don't like the system but to explore this in detail would turn a 3 page review into a four page review. This isn't a review of UPlay, it is a preview of the game. My critique of UPlay is right out there, on the first page. Anyone interested in looking more deeply into can do that. There are very few publications, online or other, that would even mention this in a preview. I put it out there because it is a hot topic. My goal isn't to editorialize my opinions on Ubisoft's DRM decisions. That is not the time to do it. Maybe I should have mentioned the continuous connection aspect but I naturally assumed that most people who come here already knew about this stuff.

I would definitely be interested in this game if not for the DRM.

I'm frankly stunned by how ridiculous the constant internet connection requirement is. Like Beach, I'm in internet-less places on my laptop and love sims like this that can be played with keyboard and mouse.

TC pointed out the problem and controversy and it is up to the reader to explore further. It is a preview article. I mean - where does it stop? Do we have to preview (exhaustively) DRM, hardware support, Operating System compatibility, video card compatibility, monitor resolutions, localizations, etc..? We review the games, but we aren't going to hold everyone's hand and do everything for them. DRM is mentioned prominently in the article, two links to discussions forums are provided, and more is promised in the full review. I simply don't agree with your beef.

Caveat emptor..

That's where I would disagree and write a preview like it could be read by anyone just dropping by, from a Google search or whatever.

I didn't want to cause a stink, all I'm saying is: If you put the positive things of a new game right in the face of a potentially uninformed reader (like, great screenshots right in the second and third page) then, to make it fair and balanced, put the negatives also right in the face of the uninformed reader. Otherwise the uninformed reader will simple drool over the great graphics and promising gameplay and "forget" to inform himself further on the negatives.

Fair comment. The first sentence in the article has been changed to "I suppose this is as good a place as any to bring up Ubisoft's new Digital Rights Management System titled UPlay, their new DRM that requires a fulltime Internet connection." My oversight that it was not included within the Preview.

Fair enough IMO.

The problem is RS, how much to you write about the negatives without tainting the whole preview? I took a paragraph and a half on a 3 page review and basically told Ubisoft that their DRM system is an unfair penalization of the consumer and is bad software. Maybe I should have mentioned the continuous connection issue but I did NOT want this section of the preview to run longer than an paragraph. The preview wasn't on UPlay it was on SHV.

But you make a point. I just wanted to not harp on it.

Thanks. It was just kinda weird in a "this is not a really good DRM system, but I don't tell you why it isn't a good system" kinda way.

Thanks for correcting it.

BTW, here's a (IMHO) better Google search regarding this system:
http://www.google.at/search?hl=de&sa...mp;aq=f&oq=

The difference to 20mm's link is interesting. Not his fault, I'm sure - but you see, if you look for "Uplay" you get the official marketing hype, where the first page of search results is entirely positive (UBIsoft PR Department press releases mostly, direct links to the Uplay plattform).

If you look for "Ubisoft online DRM", you find more of the real problems since it doesn't contain the Ubisoft marketing keywords.

Tom, sorry, above reply was written directly for Doug.

Maybe I'm being wrong in what I think SimHQ's job is in these things, but for me the site has the chance (and almost a moral obligation) to warn the simulation community of all pitfalls with these new systems. And not just people who visit regularly and might have read it offhand, but also those who Google "SH5 Preview" and come to the site without any previous information.


SH5 is an extreme example: If you take away the DRM, the remaining stuff we know so far seems overwhelming positive. Kinda like Rise of Flight.

That IMHO makes it such a touchy subject to review. If you are focusing on the DRM, it seems you are harping on it. If you are not focusing on the DRM, you're blending out the biggest negative in the entire game.

I don't envy Tom when he has to do the full review.