PDA

View Full Version : From Dust PC Official Statement



bukowski113
08-22-2011, 12:26 PM
We recognize that one of our posts in the From Dust forum regarding the need for authentication in the game was not clear. We sincerely apologize for the misunderstanding. Our tech teams are working on a patch that should release in approximately two weeks that will eliminate the need for any online authentication. This development time is required as we are working to ensure that those who have already started the game, and whoís progress is currently saved on our servers, will receive and save their game information locally. Once the patch is ready, players who already have the game will automatically receive the update on their next login and subsequent game sessions will be 100% offline.

jokomul
08-22-2011, 12:34 PM
I'll believe it when I see it.

Daroth_343
08-22-2011, 12:37 PM
That's excellent news, thanks for making the right decision. I'm convinced that removing the DRM will be beneficial to all the parties involved (Ubisoft, digital retailers and the people playing the game). Like I said in a different thread, sometimes "less is more" in regards to DRM.

dariuszp
08-22-2011, 12:48 PM
Sorry guys but damage is done. I still demand refunds (my ticket is in the support). It's not only about DRM that make the game unplayable (and constant Internet connection cause loot of problems to me and others). It's about:

1. lying to your customers
2. punishing customers that paid you
3. ignoring people on support

Ad1. Information that there will be no require for constant internet connection was put 1 august 2011. 17 august 2011 game was released according to gaming portals. 18 august - there was new information that there IS that annoying DRM included. How is that you release a game and you didn't know what kind of copy protection it use ?

Ad2. We pay for your games. Yet you punish US. Pirates put a crack on a game and play it. We have problems. Why ?

Ad3. I get a response "We investigating" while I only want to return the game that is broken and it's a game that I didn't ordered (I was ordering game without annoying DRM as I was thinking). All people under my article in portal that I write reviews (and where I review From Dust by the way) claim that they get same response or no response at all.
Those who get response was send to Steam. Steam send them back to Ubisoft. Circle closed.

So It will not help. I want return the game. But glad that you make up your mind and you are removing this "protection" that only thing is doing - is causing problems to your customers.

jokomul
08-22-2011, 01:17 PM
Also, I find this:




Posted Mon August 22 2011 11:26
We recognize that one of our posts in the From Dust forum regarding the need for authentication in the game was not clear. We sincerely apologize for the misunderstanding.


pretty hilarious. The post was perfectly clear. There was no misunderstanding. It just turned out that the post was incorrect/untrue.

MrDarkie1337
08-22-2011, 01:45 PM
Well thats fine and dandy, But what about the other issues that we are complaining about? FPS Cap, no Graphics Options, Terrible controls?

kadayi
08-22-2011, 01:54 PM
1. lying to your customers
2. punishing customers that paid you
3. ignoring people on support

You might not rest, but companies generally do when it comes to weekends. I doubt anyone was around who could authorize anything until today. DRM is being removed, but I guess some people can't see the wood for the trees when it comes to good news. Yesterday now exists only in your head. Move on.

Methons
08-22-2011, 01:55 PM
thats a start now what about the rest of it. your actions here will influence my decision on annon 2070.

Hertston
08-22-2011, 02:38 PM
Originally posted by bukowski113:
We recognize that one of our posts in the From Dust forum regarding the need for authentication in the game was not clear.

This BS just defies belief, Mr bukowski113. The post stated that


To prevent any on-going confusion we would like to clarify From Dust PC will release with DRM requiring a one-time only online activation. After which you will be able to play the game offline.

Perhaps you might 'clarify' exactly what is so 'unclear' about that?!

JudgeOrlok
08-22-2011, 03:01 PM
This is both unexpected and fantastic news. I'm glad to see that Ubisoft has listened to its customers. The patch will no doubt reduce piracy of this game more than the DRM did. For what it's worth, my trust in you has been restored, Ubisoft (or at least will be when the patch comes out). Leaving the unadvertised DRM in the game would have been a pretty sleazy move.

kadayi
08-22-2011, 03:32 PM
Originally posted by Hertston:
[QUOTE]Perhaps you might 'clarify' exactly what is so 'unclear' about that?!

Maybe the person who informed him got it wrong? A breakdown in communication somewhere in the line? A memo wasn't updated? The sort of thing that happens in any large office all the time? After all there's a lot of people at Ubisoft and it's human to err no?

Stikmanlock
08-22-2011, 03:41 PM
Originally posted by bukowski113:
We recognize that one of our posts in the From Dust forum regarding the need for authentication in the game was not clear. We sincerely apologize for the misunderstanding. Our tech teams are working on a patch that should release in approximately two weeks that will eliminate the need for any online authentication. This development time is required as we are working to ensure that those who have already started the game, and whoís progress is currently saved on our servers, will receive and save their game information locally. Once the patch is ready, players who already have the game will automatically receive the update on their next login and subsequent game sessions will be 100% offline.

I'm a little bit uncertain. Do you mean that DRM will be removed for everyone or just those who have already bought the game?

ms-kleaneasy
08-22-2011, 04:55 PM
Originally posted by Stikmanlock:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bukowski113:
We recognize that one of our posts in the From Dust forum regarding the need for authentication in the game was not clear. We sincerely apologize for the misunderstanding. Our tech teams are working on a patch that should release in approximately two weeks that will eliminate the need for any online authentication. This development time is required as we are working to ensure that those who have already started the game, and whoís progress is currently saved on our servers, will receive and save their game information locally. Once the patch is ready, players who already have the game will automatically receive the update on their next login and subsequent game sessions will be 100% offline.

I'm a little bit uncertain. Do you mean that DRM will be removed for everyone or just those who have already bought the game? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It will be removed full stop; itís not possible to run a system where some games itís patched out while others are not.

The reference to those already playing was made to explain the delay in releasing the patch. The dev team want to ensure those already playing the game are not negatively affected by the decision to remove the DRM, and so need some time to ensure the game saves among other things are resolved first.

I hope that clarifies things http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

mothmanex
08-22-2011, 05:22 PM
Well at least one of the multiple problems will be fixed. Now some of us need to actually see the menu to play...
<span class="flash-video">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uiBdrapdLhc</span>

va.va85
08-22-2011, 05:30 PM
When a patch not only removes the DRM but also fixes all the lousy port issues I'll reconsider buying this game again. I love Eric's work but, thank God, Get Games refunded my purchase.

ars-stigmata
08-22-2011, 09:19 PM
Originally posted by bukowski113:
We recognize that one of our posts in the From Dust forum regarding the need for authentication in the game was not clear. We sincerely apologize for the misunderstanding. Our tech teams are working on a patch that should release in approximately two weeks that will eliminate the need for any online authentication. This development time is required as we are working to ensure that those who have already started the game, and whoís progress is currently saved on our servers, will receive and save their game information locally. Once the patch is ready, players who already have the game will automatically receive the update on their next login and subsequent game sessions will be 100% offline.

The causation in this post is very clearly the confusion caused by a post, not by the legitimate anger of Ubi's users over the DRM itself. Anyone reading this as a patch that we can't reasonably expect from any future Ubisoft title?

Zerogeist
08-22-2011, 10:29 PM
Originally posted by ars-stigmata:
The causation in this post is very clearly the confusion caused by a post, not by the legitimate anger of Ubi's users over the DRM itself. -snip-

I, too, was expecting an apology pertaining to Ubisoft's fanaticism in regards to intrusive DRM that degrades the play experience of legitimate customers.

As you pointed out, that's not what we got. We got corporate damage-control.

Here's to hoping someone at Ubi will have the stones to make this right by:
1) honoring refund requests.
2) taking a very serious look at the impact this kind of DRM has on their business image.

i am not so delusional to think they don't have data to support DRM's ability to protect profit - but anyone at Ubi who thinks this will have a positive lasting effect is simply short-sighted.

dariuszp
08-22-2011, 11:31 PM
Originally posted by kadayi:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">1. lying to your customers
2. punishing customers that paid you
3. ignoring people on support

You might not rest, but companies generally do when it comes to weekends. I doubt anyone was around who could authorize anything until today. DRM is being removed, but I guess some people can't see the wood for the trees when it comes to good news. Yesterday now exists only in your head. Move on. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's not only me. Some people wait longer than me and still don't have things clear.
Ubisoft should honor refund request and talk to the Steam.
Good news ? What ? That I can PLAY game that I bought 2 WEEKS AFTER I PAYED FOR IT ?

Sorry but "tomorrow" will be the same as today. Game is unplayable and I want my money back.

mr_bad09
08-23-2011, 01:35 AM
Originally posted by ars-stigmata:
The causation in this post is very clearly the confusion caused by a post, not by the legitimate anger of Ubi's users over the DRM itself. Anyone reading this as a patch that we can't reasonably expect from any future Ubisoft title?

Yeah it's certainly damage control on giving customers the wrong info on From Dust DRM only, they've still not patched it out of the previous titles so I see no reason why this positive move would continue on future titles crippled with UbiDRM.

However, many people bought the game on the back of being told there was no UbiDRM and demanded refunds from both Steam and Ubi once they knew From Dust was infected so Ubi could actually see how it affects sales this time rather than us all just ignoring the games in the first place. Maybe, just maybe, this mess up will be a wake up call for Ubi and highlight the hatred of their treatment of legitimate customers.

We can hope but I'm not optimistic myself.

Campuschris
08-23-2011, 02:04 AM
While it does suck that I cannot play this game for 2 more weeks, I am at least content that Ubisoft has seen reason and allowed us this patch.

Despite this fiasco, I would even go so far as to say that if similar posts were made in regard to future titles (such as Heroes VI), I would renew my pre-order (which I cancelled due to all this). If this mess is what it took to open Ubi's eyes and help they realize punishing paying users while rewarding pirates is a bad idea, then I'm all for it. Hell, some of my favorite games used to have the Starforce DRM on em... the second that DRM was removed, I bought em and have loved those games ever since.

Here's hoping Driver has just a one time activation, as well! I haven't played part of that series for a while and would love a chance to play more! hehe

noTHINGfaced
08-23-2011, 02:05 AM
I'm not one for celebrating often and this is still one of those cases. I haven't posted on these Ubisoft forums for a good three years until I bought this game. I hadn't realised that DRM had got this punitive!

And as for a 'misunderstanding'! My arse. Still no admission that they made a mistake misrepresenting the terrible customer punishing DRM!

I'm 38 now, far too old for this hassle over a damn £15 game! Certainly far too old to be taken as a mug by some computer game company!

... Doesn't encourage a repeat purchase of any Ubisoft product in the future! Puts them in the 'Definitely not for me' section...

Have fun all... Remember, you lot are the customer, don't pay to be mugged off by this lot.

Campuschris
08-23-2011, 02:06 AM
Originally posted by Methons:
thats a start now what about the rest of it. your actions here will influence my decision on annon 2070.

Omg the Anno series one of my favorites. I completely forgot those are Ubi games. I sincerely hope they don't stick that DRM on the Annos! It would kill me to have to pass up one of those... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Stikmanlock
08-23-2011, 02:15 AM
Originally posted by ms-kleaneasy:
It will be removed full stop; itís not possible to run a system where some games itís patched out while others are not.

The reference to those already playing was made to explain the delay in releasing the patch. The dev team want to ensure those already playing the game are not negatively affected by the decision to remove the DRM, and so need some time to ensure the game saves among other things are resolved first.

I hope that clarifies things http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Ahh right, thank you! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

ParadiseDecayTM
08-23-2011, 02:50 AM
Is this patch also going to include 'Additional Graphic Options'?

CGWarp
08-23-2011, 03:03 AM
Steam and Ubisoft quite rudely denied my request. They clearly wanted to hog at least my money for the product they announced wrong.

Who cares, a 15 dollar lesson learned for me, a 150+ dollar lesson learned for Ubisoft. I canceled my preorder for Deus Ex, for Might and Magic, will not get Trackmania... I mean, why get a partial game with problems and pay for it, if pirates get the full game without problems for free?

Wait, partial game you say? It's been going on for some time that developers (Ubisoft riding ahead) release only partial versions of a game, with only a selected retailer having additional content... http://i.imgur.com/25vWH.png better click on it fast, it will be censored!

Good thing pirates get an all in one version without being restricted to a single retailer, lucky them...

(Not to mention that everyone buying it on Steam seems to be screwd, no additional content whatsoever, congrats guys)

ars-stigmata
08-23-2011, 03:49 AM
Originally posted by ParadiseDecayTM:
Is this patch also going to include 'Additional Graphic Options'?

http://i962.photobucket.com/albums/ae108/wastrel65/Ars/joking.png

kekar
08-23-2011, 04:45 AM
Now I'm considering purchasing this game.

DRM removed, does it only mean that *only* the persistent online connection towards UBI's servers is removed? Or does it also mean that the initial online-activation also removed? This do matter to me..

MrDarkie1337
08-23-2011, 04:49 AM
Originally posted by kekar:
Now I'm considering purchasing this game.

DRM removed, does it only mean that *only* the persistent online connection towards UBI's servers is removed? Or does it also mean that the initial online-activation also removed? This do matter to me..

No, Don't buy the game just yet. Wait until they actually fix the ingame problems people are moaning about such as, well, I dunno, the entire thing due to it being an Xbox port?

Controls as terrible, levels are buggy etc etc. The list goes on.

kekar
08-23-2011, 04:57 AM
Oh, thanks for the heads-up.

mr_bad09
08-23-2011, 06:06 AM
Originally posted by CGWarp:...I canceled my preorder for Deus Ex...

Just a heads up, Deus Ex is nothing to do with Ubi thank god so you are fine with your purchase. It does use internet DRM in form of Steamworks sadly but of course Steam has OFFLINE MODE so it's all good. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

ParadiseDecayTM
08-23-2011, 06:06 AM
Originally posted by ars-stigmata:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ParadiseDecayTM:
Is this patch also going to include 'Additional Graphic Options'?

http://i962.photobucket.com/albums/ae108/wastrel65/Ars/joking.png </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why would one joke about 'essential options' for todays standard of gaming? Thats like selling a car in the Sahara without air-con. Its not rocket science.

illuv4t4r
08-23-2011, 07:19 AM
Originally posted by MrDarkie1337:
Well thats fine and dandy, But what about the other issues that we are complaining about? FPS Cap, no Graphics Options, Terrible controls?

^This.. Please, dev team, the two most important issues in the PC release currently are control related:

1. Mouse control/camera movement: The mouse cursor (breath) needs to be unbound from the camera movement i.e. only WASD for camera (or add option for this). Unchecking mouse scroll helps, but does not eliminate the issue entirely.

2. Extremely limited camera tilt and height: When adjusting the camera's tilt (or pitch) the threshold is extremely limited. We should have the ability to tilt the camera angle from -90 degrees to at least +10 degrees throughout gameplay. Finally, the maximum height of the camera should be increased to allow comfortable view of the landscape, including volcano peeks and/or mountain tops.

Fixing these two issues alone, would MASSIVELY improve the gameplay experience. Cutscene skip option, music/sound volume sliders, some graphics options (including remove 30 FPS cap) would make it perfect.

My two cents.

ms-kleaneasy
08-23-2011, 08:27 AM
Quick reminder to all - if you've not already please post any game related feedback into the appropriate sticky threads. They are being monitored and we will be collating your feedback to report.

If we can keep this thread on the subject of the DRM and its removal that would be great, thanks http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

jamyskis
08-23-2011, 08:48 AM
We recognize that one of our posts in the From Dust forum regarding the need for authentication in the game was not clear...


Seems that Ubisoft has a very short memory. (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/images/11/aug/ubiforum.jpg)

Insomniac8
08-23-2011, 10:04 AM
Am I reading that right that the removal of the DRM is also removing cloud saves? If so I don't see why these two have to be linked. Steam manages to handle both offline mode and cloud saves.

ms-kleaneasy
08-23-2011, 10:23 AM
Originally posted by Insomniac8:
Am I reading that right that the removal of the DRM is also removing cloud saves? If so I don't see why these two have to be linked. Steam manages to handle both offline mode and cloud saves.

Itís my understanding the OSP system works by requiring a login each time you play and continued connection which in turn is used to create a back-up save on the cloud.

If they remove the need to login and stay connected each time you play the back-up on the cloud is not created because that connection has not been established.

How this compares to Steam I do not know as Iíve not used Steam, if you feel they need to change how it works that sort of feedback will be taken on board, but as things currently stand the cloud save is directly linked to the need to login, so itís either login, stay connected and cloud or none of the above and you can play offline as you see fit.

Durahl
08-23-2011, 12:42 PM
Still beeing interested in the game even though I was able to get a refund I'm wondering about how exactly this is planned to be solved by the DEV's.

If I can run it without connecting it to any kind of Account ( except for the sole purpose of buying it like Steam ) I'll be very much interested to spend my 15 bucks once more on this.

While the Forum Admins might not be able to give an immediate answer to this Question until it has been re-released I was wonderig if this Thread could be seen as an Information Platform for the next 2 weeks?

ms-kleaneasy
08-23-2011, 01:09 PM
Originally posted by Durahl:
Still beeing interested in the game even though I was able to get a refund I'm wondering about how exactly this is planned to be solved by the DEV's.

If I can run it without connecting it to any kind of Account ( except for the sole purpose of buying it like Steam ) I'll be very much interested to spend my 15 bucks once more on this.

While the Forum Admins might not be able to give an immediate answer to this Question until it has been re-released I was wonderig if this Thread could be seen as an Information Platform for the next 2 weeks?

To download the patch which will remove the DRM you will need to have registered the game, a process which does require you to link an account.

Once the patch has been downloaded the game will play without a connection or any requirement to login.

I suspect any digital purchase will require the user to download and install the patch, but I will try and find out if an updated version of the game (i.e. with the DRM already removed) is planned to be made available.

MrDarkie1337
08-23-2011, 01:52 PM
No offense ms_kleaneasy, But are you 100% sure that what you are saying is true? Considering it was you yourself that made the very controversal statement of -> http://www.rockpapershotgun.co.../11/aug/ubiforum.jpg (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/images/11/aug/ubiforum.jpg) <- saying that the DRM would be a one time activation and when it didn't happen, Everyone used your posts against Ubisoft and you turned into the laughing stock.

In regard to the DRM, Yeah, Great move. Now fix all the other issues in the game and actually make it a PC game not just a shoddy Xbox port with a PC DRM. Funny how one of the only things put on the PC version was a negative thing i.e. DRM. Good logic Ubisoft!

ms-kleaneasy
08-23-2011, 02:20 PM
I'm telling you what I know to be true at this time and as I've said double checking the rest, I'll reply further when I've more information.

jamyskis
08-23-2011, 02:31 PM
Originally posted by ms-kleaneasy:
To download the patch which will remove the DRM you will need to have registered the game, a process which does require you to link an account.

Once the patch has been downloaded the game will play without a connection or any requirement to login.

I suspect any digital purchase will require the user to download and install the patch, but I will try and find out if an updated version of the game (i.e. with the DRM already removed) is planned to be made available.

Not trying to be funny ms-kleaneasy, but I think your community team really needs to sit down with your publishing team and be clear on what is happening, because you all seem to be heading in entirely different directions.

bukowski113 said in this very thread:


Our tech teams are working on a patch that should release in approximately two weeks that will eliminate the need for any online authentication.

Whereas you have just said:


To download the patch which will remove the DRM you will need to have registered the game, a process which does require you to link an account.

Notice the contradiction? Bukowski says you don't need to authenticate at all, whereas you indicate that you will need to download the patch from your already authenticated version.

Of course, if your investigations reveal that a standalone DRM-less version IS on the way, then I guess we can bring this particular sordid affair to a conclusion. But you will understand if we are all a little sceptical about Ubisoft's readiness to follow through on its promises until the real deal materialises.

Having been a community manager myself, I know from experience (and my own mistakes) how important it is that the community team at least gives the appearance of toeing the company line. Given that Ubisoft has pretty much trashed its reputation over the past two years with the various DRM debacles, presenting such a chaotic front to the general community isn't a good sign of things to come.

ars-stigmata
08-23-2011, 02:42 PM
Originally posted by ParadiseDecayTM:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ars-stigmata:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ParadiseDecayTM:
Is this patch also going to include 'Additional Graphic Options'?

http://i962.photobucket.com/albums/ae108/wastrel65/Ars/joking.png </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why would one joke about 'essential options' for todays standard of gaming? Thats like selling a car in the Sahara without air-con. Its not rocket science. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

We've been asked to stay on topic since you posted, so all I'll say on this is that yes, that's the precise point I was attempting to make.

ms-kleaneasy
08-23-2011, 03:25 PM
@jamyskis - I fully understand exactly what you're saying which is why I'm double checking, I'm as keen as anyone else here to ensure the matter is resolved and with absolutely no room for confusion.

To clarify I'm aiming to establish...

If a DRM free version will be available at point of sale i.e. no need to patch once bought and installed.
And if so when this will be available i.e. at the same time as the patch releases, before or after and if so when.

Unfortunately the downside to everyoneís eagerness to ensure this is clear means it may take a little longer than normal to provide that information as everyone will undoubtedly want to double and triple check things before confirming, but I will be back with that information as soon as I can http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

ars-stigmata
08-23-2011, 03:33 PM
So, given that the DRM has demonstrated itself to be actively user-hostile, unpopular to the point of whipping up a media furor, entirely ineffective against cracking and buggy to the point of needing to be urgently patched out, can you confirm that future Ubisoft titles will be without this DRM feature?

Or are you just going to do this again in a few months' time?

Pstftrnt
08-23-2011, 03:42 PM
I don't understand why people complaining about DRM. I bought "From Dust" (on Steam) and I'm playing ALREADY offline with no issues.
Before starting the game, in the Ubisoft launcher, there is an option on top right that permits to playing offline.
The problems are IN the game and not BEFORE (like Silent Hunter 5), but this is another story...

ars-stigmata
08-23-2011, 03:46 PM
Originally posted by Pstftrnt:
I don't understand why people complaining about DRM. I bought "From Dust" (on Steam) and I'm playing ALREADY offline with no issues.
Before starting the game, in the Ubisoft launcher, there is an option on top right that permits to playing offline.
The problems are IN the game and not BEFORE (like Silent Hunter 5), but this is another story...

I bought it on Steam, but can't play it because of this DRM. Ubisoft's support haven't even replied in the three days since I lodged my ticket.

Methons
08-23-2011, 03:47 PM
stigmata this is ubisoft we are talking about. when was the last time they gave up on an idea.

ars-stigmata
08-23-2011, 03:49 PM
Originally posted by Methons:
stigmata this is ubisoft we are talking about. when was the last time they gave up on an idea.

That's why I asked.

So, anyone from Ubi want to answer that question at the bottom of page 3?

Daroth_343
08-23-2011, 04:07 PM
Originally posted by ars-stigmata:
So, given that the DRM has demonstrated itself to be actively user-hostile, unpopular to the point of whipping up a media furor, entirely ineffective against cracking and buggy to the point of needing to be urgently patched out, can you confirm that future Ubisoft titles will be without this DRM feature?
I assume they're very busy analyzing what happened with From Dust. Their DRM was circumvented in less than a day after the game was released and given how the same type of DRM is supposed be used in the upcoming Driver, that's a serious problem. In its current form the DRM is useless though, so they'll probably either try to update it, make it always-online again (unlikely) or remove it altogether. It'll be interesting to see what happens next.

ms-kleaneasy
08-23-2011, 04:18 PM
Originally posted by ars-stigmata:
So, given that the DRM has demonstrated itself to be actively user-hostile, unpopular to the point of whipping up a media furor, entirely ineffective against cracking and buggy to the point of needing to be urgently patched out, can you confirm that future Ubisoft titles will be without this DRM feature?

Or are you just going to do this again in a few months' time?

I cannot confirm any plans for DRM in future titles sorry


Originally posted by ars-stigmata:
I bought it on Steam, but can't play it because of this DRM. Ubisoft's support haven't even replied in the three days since I lodged my ticket.

Please contact me in PT

out-side
08-23-2011, 04:30 PM
Originally posted by ars-stigmata:
So, given that the DRM has demonstrated itself to be actively user-hostile, unpopular to the point of whipping up a media furor, entirely ineffective against cracking and buggy to the point of needing to be urgently patched out, can you confirm that future Ubisoft titles will be without this DRM feature?

Or are you just going to do this again in a few months' time?

They are going to be using it for Driver: San Francisco.


Originally posted by Pstftrnt:
I don't understand why people complaining about DRM. I bought "From Dust" (on Steam) and I'm playing ALREADY offline with no issues.
Before starting the game, in the Ubisoft launcher, there is an option on top right that permits to playing offline.
The problems are IN the game and not BEFORE (like Silent Hunter 5), but this is another story...

And that's the real problem, you and other people like you, Ubisoft included, are so selfish that because they do not have a problem with it, then no one can have a problem with it. While in the real world, gamers are and do have serious problems with it not working.

That button you are talking about, you have to be online for it to work.

alephzombie
08-23-2011, 04:58 PM
I'm absolutely not placated.

There's been no apology for the pre-release statements as to From Dust and DRM.

There's been no apology for changing information given to presale customers after the fact, and deleting/editing tweets and posts relating to the DRM promises.

There's been no apology for the folks who were given different hardware support information at presale than what actually turned out to be supported-- changes to system requirements after the fact amount to their own kind of bait and switch. This doesn't affect me personally but I have no room to forgive a company that advertises one product, takes your presale money for it, and then delivers another.

In short, Ubisoft has apologized for 'confusion' and for the forum post but has not owned up to nor even disavowed the practice of taking presale money for a product and delivering a product of substantially different nature.

A company that lies to me doesn't get my business, period, especially when they refuse refunds when the customer is justifiably dissatisfied. The right thing to do, the smart thing to do, would be to refund to people who felt cheated and deactivate their CD keys. The greedy, short-sighted, STUPID thing to do is to hang on to their measly $15, alienate them, and try to fix it after the fact without so much as acknowledging the substance of their complaints. It's positively /slimy/ to try to pass this off as a 'misunderstanding', and I doubt anybody with half a brain is going to forget that, either.

If a stereo manufacturer advertised one product, without even taking my money for it the way Ubisoft did, and then tried to switch it for another product at the point of purchase, I would have a claim against them in my state (and under the long arm statute, virtually anywhere else). That the law has not yet caught up with fraudulent presale of software products is a shame, and I am beginning to hope it is a temporary one.

ms-kleaneasy
08-23-2011, 05:28 PM
Originally posted by alephzombie:
I'm absolutely not placated.

There's been no apology for the pre-release statements as to From Dust and DRM.

There's been no apology for changing information given to presale customers after the fact, and deleting/editing tweets and posts relating to the DRM promises.

For what itís worth I have said sorry

MrDarkie1337
08-23-2011, 09:37 PM
You shouldn't have to be saying sorry, Although I / We appreciate it, It really should be Ubisoft apologizing for their lies, their terrible port and THEIR mistakes. Not saying your apology isn't welcomed, Just saying they are avoiding apologising and it looks like they are STILL trying to stand on the morale high-ground by refusing to talk about the other issues everyone has raised

ars-stigmata
08-23-2011, 09:38 PM
Originally posted by ms-kleaneasy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ars-stigmata:
So, given that the DRM has demonstrated itself to be actively user-hostile, unpopular to the point of whipping up a media furor, entirely ineffective against cracking and buggy to the point of needing to be urgently patched out, can you confirm that future Ubisoft titles will be without this DRM feature?

Or are you just going to do this again in a few months' time?

I cannot confirm any plans for DRM in future titles sorry </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmmph.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ars-stigmata:
I bought it on Steam, but can't play it because of this DRM. Ubisoft's support haven't even replied in the three days since I lodged my ticket.

Please contact me in PT </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thought I should post this publicly since it'll be pertinent to others, that Steam contacted me an hour ago with an offer of a refund. I'll take it up and reconsider my position once the game's been patched a few times.

Insomniac8
08-24-2011, 07:29 AM
Originally posted by ms-kleaneasy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Insomniac8:
Am I reading that right that the removal of the DRM is also removing cloud saves? If so I don't see why these two have to be linked. Steam manages to handle both offline mode and cloud saves.

Itís my understanding the OSP system works by requiring a login each time you play and continued connection which in turn is used to create a back-up save on the cloud.

If they remove the need to login and stay connected each time you play the back-up on the cloud is not created because that connection has not been established.

How this compares to Steam I do not know as Iíve not used Steam, if you feel they need to change how it works that sort of feedback will be taken on board, but as things currently stand the cloud save is directly linked to the need to login, so itís either login, stay connected and cloud or none of the above and you can play offline as you see fit. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The steam system work by, having a separeate local folder for cloud saves that is then synced when the game exits. If playing in offline mode the save games are synced when next switching back to online mode. I feel a similar aproach is needed here.

Removing the nead for an always on connection is not the same as removing the option to be logged in. It is the requirement to be always on that is the issue. Players should be able to play in online mode and use the cloud saves, then disconnect with their laptop, play on the train offline and upload the save once re-connecting when they get back.

At the very least, a manual "upload saves" / "download saves" option would do the trick.

Durahl
08-24-2011, 07:53 AM
Originally posted by ars-stigmata:
So, given that the DRM has demonstrated itself to be actively user-hostile, unpopular to the point of whipping up a media furor, entirely ineffective against cracking and buggy to the point of needing to be urgently patched out, can you confirm that future Ubisoft titles will be without this DRM feature?

Or are you just going to do this again in a few months' time?

Stop beeing ridiculous.

They haven't removed it because everyones ****ed about the Ubisoft Game Launcher in general.

They have removed it because of the not so well handled statement on the Games DRM Situation leading to a false interpretation/communication.

That's quite a difference you got there buddy.

One does qualify for dropping the Launcher while the other does not.

ZakMckrack3n
08-24-2011, 11:15 AM
Thank you Ubisoft for removing this DRM. The game should have been "one-time activation" to begin with. I am not placated, either, though. I do not appreciate being lied to. I do not appreciate Ubisoft trying to cover it up by deleting/editing posts instead of coming clean. I do not appreciate being treated like a thief (by the OSP) when I actually have purchased the game.

The other disappointing part of all this is that Ubisoft does not seem to have realized that their OSP is turning away consumers. Yes, I am one of the users complaining about the OSP in general. The new Driver game immediately dropped off my wishlist when it was announced it would have the OSP DRM.

After this fiasco, I will not be preordering any other Ubisoft games, and I will wait until it is verified the OSP has not been included before I will purchase ANY Ubisoft product.

CrimsonKaisha
08-24-2011, 11:49 AM
Sorry but too little too late. I'm getting my refund and never looking back. Patch, don't patch, I don't care. This was the 1st ubisoft game I've purchased, and will be the last.

ars-stigmata
08-24-2011, 02:23 PM
Originally posted by Durahl:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ars-stigmata:
So, given that the DRM has demonstrated itself to be actively user-hostile, unpopular to the point of whipping up a media furor, entirely ineffective against cracking and buggy to the point of needing to be urgently patched out, can you confirm that future Ubisoft titles will be without this DRM feature?

Or are you just going to do this again in a few months' time?

Stop beeing ridiculous.

They haven't removed it because everyones ****ed about the Ubisoft Game Launcher in general.

They have removed it because of the not so well handled statement on the Games DRM Situation leading to a false interpretation/communication.

That's quite a difference you got there buddy.

One does qualify for dropping the Launcher while the other does not. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sense: this post makes none. You don't appear to have actually read what I said over the course of this and other threads, just sayin'.

redsoxman6594
08-24-2011, 02:31 PM
That's all just dandy, but what about fixing the problem where Intel chipsets are not compatible with the game? Pretty rediculous and angering problem. This is a huge disappointment. I can't even play my copy now.

ARustyFirePlace
08-24-2011, 04:24 PM
Originally posted by redsoxman6594:
That's all just dandy, but what about fixing the problem where Intel chipsets are not compatible with the game? Pretty rediculous and angering problem. This is a huge disappointment. I can't even play my copy now. Give me a list of recent 3D games you can play with that GPU.

infact, it's not really a gpu anyway.

MatheusTalacio
08-24-2011, 08:21 PM
Originally posted by ARustyFirePlace:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by redsoxman6594:
That's all just dandy, but what about fixing the problem where Intel chipsets are not compatible with the game? Pretty rediculous and angering problem. This is a huge disappointment. I can't even play my copy now. Give me a list of recent 3D games you can play with that GPU.

infact, it's not really a gpu anyway. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Team Fortress 2 (Normal)
The Sims 3 (Medium)
GTA IV (Medium)
Portal 2 (Medium)

I can run all the newest games with, why Ubisoft can do the game with a Graphics Patch to Intel card too?

Will earn more money --' all the games (85% do this)

Dederocks
08-25-2011, 06:21 AM
oh thats perfect, NOW FIX THE REST OF THE GAME....

alephzombie
08-25-2011, 08:06 AM
Originally posted by ms-kleaneasy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by alephzombie:
I'm absolutely not placated.

There's been no apology for the pre-release statements as to From Dust and DRM.

There's been no apology for changing information given to presale customers after the fact, and deleting/editing tweets and posts relating to the DRM promises.

For what itís worth I have said sorry </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, I don't think it's fair you're having to say sorry. I think they're throwing you under the bus, that's the point I was trying to make, sorry for not being clear. They've tried to pin this all on your forum post and acted as though they didn't have pre-release statements to the press saying there wouldn't be this kind of DRM on From Dust, when they did. They had tweets deleted, and they tried to pretend they never said anything. Because of RPS having a screenshot of you, probably just stating what YOU were told, they haven't been able to just withdraw the post and pretend it didn't happen the way they've pretended the rest didn't happen.

I think it's unfair, and a raw deal, which is why none of Ubi's actions post-release have convinced me Ubisoft is an honest company worth dealing with.

For what it's worth, I feel a lot of sympathy for you and I think you're being treated really unfairly.

badbodd
08-25-2011, 02:36 PM
While DRM, especially when it works against the legitimate user, is annoying; I am connected 24/7 so wouldn't care too much about that. I live in Thailand where both internet and Electric can be sporadic, a UPS fixed the electric part. Hmm what about ok internet, ok I see the problem.

My complaint is about the weird controls, and the bug in lvl 8 'High Tides' that means I can't progress.

Given that my PC can kick the rear of an xbox any day - I wonder at the slightly unresponsive controls and (what would appear to be) polygon count timers.

Anyway, the game is good, but!!! I cant get past the High Tides due to a bug, and therefore the much lauded sandbox (well nearly) mode at the final lvl I really wanted to play with, is un-obtainable to me.

I pre-purchased, for the first time ever. And the last!

I am usually the guy who picks these things up a day or 2 after everyone else and does not find any problems. The fixes were auto downloaded by the game at first launch. Patches that arrive within a couple days of release is what I am used to. To pre-purchase and now 8 days in and no fix for a major bug is weird.

Oh well, how long after purchase can I still get a refund from Steam?

CapN111
08-25-2011, 04:28 PM
Originally posted by jamyskis:


Our tech teams are working on a patch that should release in approximately two weeks that will eliminate the need for any online authentication.


To download the patch which will remove the DRM you will need to have registered the game, a process which does require you to link an account.

I am still looking forward for an answer that resolves this contradiction.

Llammahed
08-25-2011, 05:39 PM
The game looked beautiful on YouTube and all the reviews were raving about the fresh ideas this game brought.

I purchased the game through steam to find the CDKey is not valid. If this is such a rampant issue and has been acknowledged as an error in the application, why are copies still being sold?

I work with a software company and setting expectations then meeting them is high-priority when it comes to making your customer-base happy with the purchase. I, amongst many, am not happy. I purchased this game after serious thought to find many, many people are having this issue. Do you not care about your name? Two weeks is a very, very long time for your developers to find the issue, fix it, thoroughly test the patch and place it on your update servers for all to download and use the game.

It must be convenient to sell a broken game exclusively in digital format. You must be counting on the many hoops a customer must go through to get a refund on a game that will not work for two weeks because of a design flaw. You have my money, and you're right, it's not worth $15 to battle steam for a refund. Eat it, Ubisoft! I'm done with you.

moterfacker
08-26-2011, 03:21 AM
that's exactly my problem
i want my money back

chilinux
08-26-2011, 10:36 PM
Previously, I found the situation with From Dust to be annoying. It wasn't until I read the bukowski113 Official Statement that I find the situation infuriating.

bukowski113: "We recognize that one of our posts in the From Dust forum regarding the need for authentication in the game was not clear."

WHAT?!?! The post was straight forward and VERY clear. Just so we don't have any more "misunderstanding," lets clarify the post that you claim was "not clear."

To quote the Ubisoft August 1st post, "To prevent any on-going confusion we would like to clarify From Dust PC will release with DRM requiring a one-time only online activation. After which you will be able to play the game offline."

That is very clear to me. The only ones that didn't seem to understand what the words "one-time" means is Ubisoft.

Oh, then bukowski113 continues: "We sincerely apologize for the misunderstanding."

So, after bukowski113 mischaracterized the Ubisoft August 1st post and thus failed to correctly acknowledge the problem, he then gives a "sincere" apology. This act fits the text-book definition of an EMPTY APOLOGY. Why bukowski113 feels than an empty apology would help this situation is beyond me but I would like to make it clear that by doing so I have nothing good left to say about Ubisoft.

But lets get to the REAL PROBLEM. This should have never made it to the forum for clarification to begin with. It should have been clear in the marketing material. Ubisoft provides what they state to be the "Minimum hardware configuration" for the game. In it they list the required OS, Processor, RAM, Video Card, Sound Card, Hard drive space and input devices (keyboard, mouse and optional).

So what happens on hardware that MEETS or even EXCEEDS the minimal hardware configuration with no additional hardware support:

"INTERNET ACCESS PROBLEM Unable to access the Internet. Please verify your connection. You can change network setting in the settings view."

Ubisoft explains on August 18th:
"'From Dust' requires an internet connection when you start the game."

WHERE in ANY of the MINIMUM hardware configuration is the hardware which provides an internet connection?!

To clarify the nature of hardware to bukowski113 and the rest of the incompetent employees of Ubisoft...

- OS does not provide Internet access
- Processor does not provide Internet access
- RAM does not provide Internet access
- Video Card does not provide Internet access
- Sound Card does not provide Internet access
- Hard Drive space does not provide Internet access
- Input devices (keyboard, mouse and optional) does not provide Internet access

Hence, NONE of the minimal hardware system requirements provide Internet access. So if the minimal hardware system requirements are SUPPORTED then the game should never be capable of producing the above error message.

Hardware that does provide internet access:
- Connected Ethernet connection
- Connected Wireless connection

According to the August 18th post, at least ONE of these are REQUIRED yet as of today (August 26th) NEITHER are on the minimal system requirements list. So that game has hardware requirements that Ubisoft purposely put into the game but decided not to list in the system requirements.

If there is a patch coming out *NOW* (as in today) which changes these system requirements then I can understand them not being updated. But I can also understand that it can take time to write and review a patch. So, if the patch is still not released, then the system requirements must be updated to match what is currently provided. Yet Ubisoft has decided to leave the system requirements incorrect. I feel this points to either one of two things:

A) Ubisoft is incompetent and doesn't understand that the Minimal System Requirements is still incorrect.

- OR -

B) Ubisoft does understand the Internet connection requirement is completely missing from both the Minimal and Recommended System Requirements but has decided to continue to misrepresent what they currently provide--or to clarify, Ubisoft seems to be committing a willful act of marketing fraud.

But since Ubisoft has clearly decided to issue empty apologizes instead of providing a system requirement list that can be trusted, I feel it is my duty to notify you that Ubisoft COMPLETELY SUCKS and has nothing redeemable to provide to the video game industry anymore.

Daroth_343
08-27-2011, 06:16 AM
Originally posted by chilinux:
This act fits the text-book definition of an EMPTY APOLOGY. Why bukowski113 feels than an empty apology would help this situation is beyond me but I would like to make it clear that by doing so I have nothing good left to say about Ubisoft.
I'd imagine there would be legal implications if they said the information they provided was wrong. That said, it's not an empty apology in the sense that there will be a patch that removes the online authentication.


Originally posted by chilinux:
But lets get to the REAL PROBLEM. This should have never made it to the forum for clarification to begin with. It should have been clear in the marketing material.
It was, both Ubishop and Steam clearly noted that on the page where you download the game:


HIGH SPEED INTERNET ACCESS AND CREATION OF A UBISOFT ACCOUNT ARE REQUIRED TO ACCESS THIS VIDEO GAME AND ONLINE FEATURES AND TO PLAY ONLINE. YOU MUST BE AT LEAST 13 TO CREATE A UBISOFT ACCOUNT WITHOUT PARENTAL CONSENT. UBISOFT MAY CANCEL ACCESS TO ONE OR MORE SPECIFIC ONLINE FEATURES UPON A 30-DAY PRIOR NOTICE PUBLISHED AT http://from-dust.ubi.com

The above statement actually implied that the DRM they used may have been of the "always-online" type. The problem was of course the forum post that "clarified" the statement but turned out to be incorrect. So I do agree that the post shouldn't have been made to begin with, and the explanation on Ubishop and Steam should have been changed to more accurately describe the type of DRM being used.


Originally posted by chilinux:
WHERE in ANY of the MINIMUM hardware configuration is the hardware which provides an internet connection?!
From that reasoning you could argue it doesn't state that you need a monitor either, yet you obviously do. Both Ubishop and Steam state that the game needs internet access, so you can't argue that you didn't know you needed hardware that provides an internet connection.

chilinux
08-27-2011, 12:54 PM
Originally posted by Daroth_343:
I'd imagine there would be legal implications if they said the information they provided was wrong.

If he can't provide an honest apology without all the spin-doctoring crap then it might be best if he left out the empty apology completely.


Originally posted by Daroth_343:
It was, both Ubishop and Steam clearly noted that on the page where you download the game:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">HIGH SPEED INTERNET ACCESS AND CREATION OF A UBISOFT ACCOUNT ARE REQUIRED TO ACCESS THIS VIDEO GAME AND ONLINE FEATURES AND TO PLAY ONLINE. YOU MUST BE AT LEAST 13 TO CREATE A UBISOFT ACCOUNT WITHOUT PARENTAL CONSENT. UBISOFT MAY CANCEL ACCESS TO ONE OR MORE SPECIFIC ONLINE FEATURES UPON A 30-DAY PRIOR NOTICE PUBLISHED AT http://from-dust.ubi.com
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What you claim is "clearly" stated is put into an area that Steam marks by CSS as "game_area_legal." Steam makes it clear they see the legal text as less important by giving it a contrast ratio of 1.9:1. According to W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 for the text to be clearly stated it should have a contrast ratio of at least 3:1. I have brought this up on the Steam forums already because I consider the contrast ratio given by the CSS rules to be Steam's fault. But the fact that Ubisoft is using an area for legal text to replace providing a complete set of system requirements is still Ubisoft's fault.


Originally posted by Daroth_343:
The above statement actually implied that the DRM they used may have been of the "always-online" type.


Given this text is marked as "legal text" it should have been explicit. According to several law professors, legal text should never be vague. Lawyers that write legal documents with vague terms usually have some shady agenda.

The text can be considered to equally refer to one-time activation as that is the common method used on Steam.


Originally posted by Daroth_343:
The problem was of course the forum post that "clarified" the statement but turned out to be incorrect.


As Ubisoft keeps pointing out to the media, "[the forums are] not an official support channel." While it seems ironic that Ubisoft is now choosing to post things titled "Official Statement" to a channel that is marked by them as unofficial, it still doesn't change the fact that when people start asking on the unofficial channels for clarification it is an indication that the official text needs to be updated for clarification. Instead of following the official route and getting the official text updated, Ubisoft decided to misrepresent the product while using their forum's unofficial status as an excuse for having done so. At anytime between then and now, Ubisoft could have done the right thing and clearly clarified the System Requirements list that each gamer should be checking. Instead, they stuff some *vague* text into the legal document area and seem to then call it a day since they still have never corrected the System Requirements.

It has been stated in past articles about Ubisoft that their DRM methods are controversial. The same articles stated that while Ubisoft is aware of the controversy, they still consider the DRM to be "successful." It seem they now have attempted to "fix" the controversy while trying to sneak past the same DRM method that caused the controversy. They just got caught red-handed this time.

Following the methodology of Occam's razor, I am left to believe that Ubisoft gamed the gamer to make an extra buck because someone at Ubisoft believed they could get away with it. Or to "clarify" for the idiots of Ubisoft, it appear to me that Ubisoft is the Enron of game companies. They might as well have "Ask Why?" under the company name. That isn't the type of company that is *FUN* to deal with which is a damning situation when it is supposed to be a game company that is selling products that are "fun."


Originally posted by Daroth_343:
So I do agree that the post shouldn't have been made to begin with, and the explanation on Ubishop and Steam should have been changed to more accurately describe the type of DRM being used.


Why the use of past tense? What has changed in what is actually *PROVIDED* *TODAY* since this admission that things might have been "not clear" started? If the patch is not available *TODAY* then why are they not at least updating the product description *TODAY*? As of right *NOW* they have done *NOTHING* but post through unofficial channels (which they have been shown to then just redact at will) that someday on some vague date their might be a patch. If what has been shown to be an overly vague product description continues to make them sales then so be it. That is the type of crappy business model that needs to get reported to the FTC.


Originally posted by Daroth_343:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by chilinux:
WHERE in ANY of the MINIMUM hardware configuration is the hardware which provides an internet connection?!
From that reasoning you could argue it doesn't state that you need a monitor either, yet you obviously do. Both Ubishop and Steam state that the game needs internet access, so you can't argue that you didn't know you needed hardware that provides an internet connection. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If a *specific* monitor type outside of the common norm is required then I would agree that those specifications also need to appear in the System Requirements. Thanks for pointing that out.

There have been some LCD shutter glasses that do have specific monitor requirements and the companies that make those products put the list of supported monitored in the *REQUIREMENTS* for the hardware instead of hidden away in a legal section or someplace else. Given Ubisoft's track record and the fact they still have not bothered to take the time to correct the system requirements, I believe it is possible if Ubisoft where to make such a product they might leave the uncommon monitor specifications off as well and then mischaracterize the product through unofficial channels.

Likewise, one-time activation is common for users of digital download game stores (Steam, Impulse, etc) and it makes sense that a game that doesn't list internet access as a minimal system requirement might require some internet access at first start-up. However, just like with the monitor, once you divert from that norm then the system requirements should be updated to list the *FULL* set of hardware that are minimally required. This is something Ubisoft STILL DOES NOT DO TODAY for this game.

Is it really too much to expect the System Requirements for the game to be updated accordingly at this point?! And if it is too much to expect from Ubisoft, then why should we ever trust them ever again?

The bottom line is that as long as the System Requirements are left incorrect, an apology is still an empty apology because they have decided to NOT correct the minimal requirements stated on the official channels to match the product as it is currently provided. That is the point at which I feel Ubisoft has made it clear they have no intention of being a trustworthy company.

DragonBall_89
08-27-2011, 04:53 PM
i don't know know why i'ts all that stuff with the DRM, if i want to buy it i will, no matter what, because i want to suport the game and the company who made it, if i don't want no matter what i will refuse to buy and i will use the cracked one, at the assassin creed 2 i buy the game but i used the cracked because that "cool" DRM, you guys just punish you're customers who actually buy the game. Until now you don't have a fully worked DRM, i mean which one is unbreakable, it's look like the ubi soft company just try he's luck to see when can put together a good working DRM and we are the rats inside the maze, the DRM it's a waste of time, energy and money, or make it perfect in this imperfect world and that will be good, but until then i suggest to keep for yourselves.

Daroth_343
08-28-2011, 06:12 AM
Originally posted by chilinux:
What you claim is "clearly" stated is put into an area that Steam marks by CSS as "game_area_legal." Steam makes it clear they see the legal text as less important by giving it a contrast ratio of 1.9:1. According to W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 for the text to be clearly stated it should have a contrast ratio of at least 3:1. I have brought this up on the Steam forums already because I consider the contrast ratio given by the CSS rules to be Steam's fault. But the fact that Ubisoft is using an area for legal text to replace providing a complete set of system requirements is still Ubisoft's fault.
Ubisoft is no doubt using that area because most people would fail to read it otherwise. On UbiShop, the notification is actually the first thing you get to read when you browse to the game's webpage (with red text on a white background). Unfortunately the system requirements aren't even listed on Ubishop though, which is definitely something they should fix. That said, I don't disagree that the system requirements should contain the information regarding the network connection. But you make it sound like the System Requirements are part of the EULA, and they aren't. It does, however, contain the mention telling the user that they need an active internet connection. So I'm not sure why you insist that the Technical Requirements should mention the internet connection when it's already in the EULA (which is supposed to be the legally binding contract you sign with Ubisoft).


Originally posted by chilinux:
Given this text is marked as "legal text" it should have been explicit. According to several law professors, legal text should never be vague. Lawyers that write legal documents with vague terms usually have some shady agenda.
What the CSS class is called on Steam makes no difference whatsoever, the legal text is in the EULA and nowhere else. And that text in the EULA wasn't actually vague:


THE MULTIMEDIA PRODUCT IS PROTECTED BY A UNIQUE AND PERSONAL KEY CODE PROVIDED BY UBISOFT TO THE USER (ďKEY CODEĒ). THE USER HEREBY AGREES, ACKNOWLEDGES AND CONSENTS TO THE FOLLOWING REGARDING THE KEY CODE AND THE USE OF THE MULTIMEDIA PRODUCT: A PERMANENT ONLINE CONNECTION AND A UBI.COM ACCOUNT ARE REQUIRED TO USE THE MULTIMEDIA PRODUCT AT ALL TIMES. THE USER SHALL BEAR THE COSTS OF THE INTERNET CONNECTION AND MAY CONTACT HIS INTERNET ACCESS PROVIDER FOR DETAILS. For further information AND THE CREATION OF A UBI.COM ACCOUNT, please visit THE ubisoft website at www.ubi.com (http://www.ubi.com).
The funny thing is that the text in the EULA is again wrong, since it states the internet connection is required at all times when it actually wasn't. This just shows their usual negligence when dealing with the PC market. They messed around with different versions of their DRM and slapped it on their product without thinking about properly informing the end-user about the changes. I can only hope they learn from this and start to provide consistent and clear information regarding the DRM to the end-user.


Originally posted by chilinux:
As Ubisoft keeps pointing out to the media, "[the forums are] not an official support channel." While it seems ironic that Ubisoft is now choosing to post things titled "Official Statement" to a channel that is marked by them as unofficial, it still doesn't change the fact that when people start asking on the unofficial channels for clarification it is an indication that the official text needs to be updated for clarification.
I completely agree.


Originally posted by chilinux:
Instead of following the official route and getting the official text updated, Ubisoft decided to misrepresent the product while using their forum's unofficial status as an excuse for having done so. At anytime between then and now, Ubisoft could have done the right thing and clearly clarified the System Requirements list that each gamer should be checking. Instead, they stuff some *vague* text into the legal document area and seem to then call it a day since they still have never corrected the System Requirements.
I again agree about the vague text but stuffing the text in the System Requirements doesn't really change all that much. It might help, but the main area where the text needs to be is in the EULA.


Originally posted by chilinux:
Following the methodology of Occam's razor, I am left to believe that Ubisoft gamed the gamer to make an extra buck because someone at Ubisoft believed they could get away with it.
There's no way I'd believe that was intentional. Occam's razor would lead me to conclude it was simply a matter of miscommunication, since that's the conclusion with which makes the fewest number of assumptions. You could come up with a theory about how Ubisoft wanted to use the non-official aspect of the forum to trick people into buying a product with a different type of DRM, but that's in no way the simplest explanation.


Originally posted by chilinux:
If the patch is not available *TODAY* then why are they not at least updating the product description *TODAY*? As of right *NOW* they have done *NOTHING* but post through unofficial channels (which they have been shown to then just redact at will) that someday on some vague date their might be a patch.
Two weeks isn't all that vague, I'm sure if they could give us a more precise date they would. And in the meanwhile they're offering refunds to people who don't want to wait for it. I don't disagree that they should provide a more accurate product description in the meanwhile though.


Originally posted by chilinux:
The bottom line is that as long as the System Requirements are left incorrect, an apology is still an empty apology because they have decided to NOT correct the minimal requirements stated on the official channels to match the product as it is currently provided. That is the point at which I feel Ubisoft has made it clear they have no intention of being a trustworthy company.
I sort of agree but I think they need to correct the EULA, not the system requirements. That and they need to provide consistent information across all their channels of communication.

chilinux
08-28-2011, 01:55 PM
Originally posted by Daroth_343:
But you make it sound like the System Requirements are part of the EULA, and they aren't.


I am talking about pre-sales communication. What are you talking about?! Where is the EULA provided BEFORE purchasing the game?

I can't find the EULA at the game web page at ubi.com. Instead it provides a link to the "Official Site" which is a Facebook page. REALLY?! Facebook is the "Official" site for a Ubisoft game?? Ubisoft is clarifying that forums.ubi.com isn't an official channel but the "Official" page for the game is not even under the ubi.com domain? Ha. Blah.

Anywho. I can't find a link to the game EULA anywhere on the "Official Site"/Facebook page either.

The System Requirements should be a quick, short and *COMPLETE* list of what I need to run the game and should always be provided as pre-sales information.

When was the last time you have read a complete EULA? Last time I updated the applications on my Apple iOS device I had to again agree to a 70+ page EULA. The typical EULA seems to be at least 10+ pages. If it is company policy that the only way they can be honest about their DRM is to stuff it in some 10+ page document between the typical EULA sections on binding arbitration and third-party use of customer data then I rather just move on to a different game company.


Originally posted by Daroth_343:
So I'm not sure why you insist that the Technical Requirements should mention the internet connection when it's already in the EULA (which is supposed to be the legally binding contract you sign with Ubisoft).


Because I insist on it being *PRE-SALES* information.

Take a guess what the top 10 results are for a Google search for: "From Dust" EULA

None of the results are to a ubisoft controlled web page. Several search results show how to get the eula.rtf as part of a torrent to the entire game. I'm definitely not looking to use that as a method to get to the EULA. Oh, cute, there is a web page about how EA will re-word their own in-house digital store-front's EULA to make it sound like giving away customer data isn't such a bad thing. Just when you thought EA couldn't get any worse...! But there is no legit link to the From Dust EULA. It seem it is just not provided as pre-sales information.


Originally posted by Daroth_343:
I can only hope they learn from this and start to provide consistent and clear information regarding the DRM to the end-user.


I am confused as to if the DRM is worth it at all. I'm getting sick of the RIAA claiming every copyright violation was a lost sale. I remember an interview with an author when asked about why he accepted having his book also sold as an eBook when there are so many people stealing eBooks and he said "Those people are not my customer and I can't force them to become my customer. I want to make it easier for people who do want to be my customer and buy my works for them to get it. Hopefully they enjoy the book and decide to become my customer in the future."

Can someone explain the statistics to me? What is the additional percentage of sales from one-time activation DRM? What is the additional percentage of sales for every start-up activation DRM? What is the additional percentage of sales for always online DRM?

Just from the results of Googling for the From Dust EULA, it seems to me that those that wanted to violate the copyright on the game have already done so regardless of the DRM used. Please keep in mind, this isn't what I was even looking for!

My priorities when gaming are fairly simple:
Step 1) Have FUN!
Step 2) Get support when having technical problems
Step 3) Not feel cheated by the process needed to play the game

So, the "official" statement through Ubisoft's unofficial channel is that about three weeks after the release of From Dust the DRM will be scaled slightly back from every start-up to one-time activitation. Does anyone have statistics on how Ubisoft feels this will impact sales? Why is it The Witcher 2 is able to scale back their DRM to *NO* DRM after less than two weeks of sales? Does Ubisoft know something that CD Projekt RED doesn't or the other way around? Why do some games always need DRM and other games like DOOM 3 reach an end of life point where the game company decides to announce the source code to the engine will be released?

My experience is that DRM creates problems for the legitimate customer and the person violating the copyright gets the better product. I have games that I payed for with SafeDisc v1 which no longer play correctly because the DRM does not correctly handle most modern DVD-ROM drives. EA tells me the game is beyond support but a friend demonstrated that DRM patch tools remove the restriction.

If DRM is required because there is statistical or logical evidence it really does translate into sales, then just be honest with me about WHY I need to jump through those hoops and WHAT exactly those hoops are. It seems to me that Ubisoft has always been vague about the "why" but now they have gotten vague/misleading about the "what" as well!

When a game company like EA lets DRM reach the point where people are using the Spore creature creator to make anti-DRM statements, it is a good sign that the game company already missed the boat on keeping a healthy relationship with it's legit customers. I really rather not see Ubisoft just become the next EA.


Originally posted by Daroth_343:
I again agree about the vague text but stuffing the text in the System Requirements doesn't really change all that much. It might help, but the main area where the text needs to be is in the EULA.


Maybe I am just beating a drum that no one is listening to, but the information needs to be provided BEFORE the sale in an EASILY found and read way. Slipping it into 1.9:1 contrast ratio legal text or on page 6 of some 10+ page document that can't even be found via google is not acceptable.


Originally posted by Daroth_343:
There's no way I'd believe that was intentional. Occam's razor would lead me to conclude it was simply a matter of miscommunication, since that's the conclusion with which makes the fewest number of assumptions.


I think it should be a given that when someone has miscommunicated they try to fix the miscommunication. While it is nice that Ubisoft now claims someday they might change the product to match the miscommunication, the issue of how the communicate in the future and if we can continue to trust them still really hasn't been addressed. The problem isn't with a single forum post being wrong but with a systematic method failed company policies in how communication is performed which made it only a matter of time before something like this happened. It should have never gotten to the point of having to be asked on the forum with no official answer to refer to.


Originally posted by Daroth_343:
Two weeks isn't all that vague, I'm sure if they could give us a more precise date they would.


Not only is the date note specific but the method of communication is via an "unofficial channel." This isn't just some "conspiracy theory" lingo I am coming up with. Ubisoft themselves stated clearly and has re-iterated that this forum is UNOFFFICIAL. So if there is a so-called "official statement" from August 22nd then where is it on the "OFFICIAL SITE"/Facebook page? Last "Wall" update was August 17th about free game codes. The Info page does not have it. The website the Info page points to does not have it on the Home, Blog (does Ubisoft even know what a Blog really is?), Game Info, World or Media pages. The Notes page on the "Official site"/Facebook was last updated July 8th. So, not only is the date vague but an commitment to this seems vague as well. If Ubisoft was committed to this being an "official statement" wouldn't it be also provided through an OFFICIAL CHANNEL??


Originally posted by Daroth_343:
And in the meanwhile they're offering refunds to people who don't want to wait for it.


Have you read the Steam From Dust forum at all?! Getting refunds is hit or miss. If you would like, I can quote some of the posts from there. Ubisoft is not coming across as an company in the "entertainment/game industry." People aren't having fun dealing with the DRM. People aren't having fun dealing with bad CD/Activation keys. People aren't having fun with the slow replies from Ubisoft support. People aren't having fun with the slow replies from Steam customer service. And people aren't having fun with the hoops to get a so-call "refund offer" which keeps getting DENIED.


Originally posted by Daroth_343:
I sort of agree but I think they need to correct the EULA, not the system requirements. That and they need to provide consistent information across all their channels of communication.

Fine. Great. Whatever. Correct the EULA instead. If this is part of pre-sales information then I would love to have access to it. Get them to link to the EULA as part of their Facebook... errr... "Official Site" page. It will be much easier to go into detail just how anti-gamer/consumer Ubisoft has gotten if I had access to the actual text of the EULA anyways.

PeteHo
08-29-2011, 02:20 AM
I wonder a bit about this part
[...]and whoís progress is currently saved on our servers[...]
since I know at least three people who bought a copy through steam and said that the "synchronising savegame" does not work due to either a "lost connection" or "unable to contact server"...

iseechiu
08-29-2011, 03:26 AM
Been a week since Support Tech Thomas replied my ticket on whether i would like a refund,not a word ever since.I think they plan on ignoring till the patch came out so they won't have to issue refunds.

Daroth_343
08-29-2011, 11:08 AM
Chilinux, I read your post and I think we're basically on the same page here. Here are a few quotes from your post which I think are definitely worth noting:


Maybe I am just beating a drum that no one is listening to, but the information needs to be provided BEFORE the sale in an EASILY found and read way.


While it is nice that Ubisoft now claims someday they might change the product to match the miscommunication, the issue of how the communicate in the future and if we can continue to trust them still really hasn't been addressed. The problem isn't with a single forum post being wrong but with a systematic method failed company policies in how communication is performed which made it only a matter of time before something like this happened. It should have never gotten to the point of having to be asked on the forum with no official answer to refer to.


If Ubisoft was committed to this being an "official statement" wouldn't it be also provided through an OFFICIAL CHANNEL??

I agree with all those points. As for the EULA, you're absolutely correct that it's currently not being provided as pre-sales information and I do think that it should. I'm actually planning to make a post on the forum about Ubishop and how it fails to detail the EULA and other essential information about PC games.

chilinux
08-29-2011, 05:11 PM
Originally posted by Daroth_343:
I agree with all those points. As for the EULA, you're absolutely correct that it's currently not being provided as pre-sales information and I do think that it should. I'm actually planning to make a post on the forum about Ubishop and how it fails to detail the EULA and other essential information about PC games.

I'm not interested in Ubishop or other single vendor digital download sites (such as EA Origin) because I think these sites are a step backward for the gaming industry.

Digital download sites that tend more toward being vendor neutral or at least make an effort to be less bias tend to get me access to a wider range of gaming concepts. I'm better able to find the types of games I enjoy by going through something like Steam, Good Old Games (gog.com), Desura, Impulse or Direct2Drive than a Ubishop or EA Origin.

While this might seem like more choice is only good for the consumer, which it might be in the short-term, I still see it as an industry wide problem. I think From Dust benefited in part by what was learned by the industry by games such as Out of this World and Populous among others. The success of independent developer's games I think are important to the success of future major title games. Otherwise, I think we may continue to see the game industry in a rut of putting out mostly FPS'es or just get into another rut of a "proven" game method.

It might be that Ubisoft has plans to expand Ubishop beyond being a single vendor store-front but based on the name they select of Ubishop, I am guessing that is not the case.

I also feel that Ubisoft's policies regarding pre-sales communications should not be viewed as a single store-front issue. Ubisoft's games are sold through multiple store-front and to reach customers like myself they will need to continue to be. Any Ubisoft's policies for how it communicates the nature of it's DRM and support needs to take all of these store fronts into account.

Lastly, I would like to see Ubisoft have a better life-cycle for software and DRM. It would be easier to accept always-on DRM if it is the policy of the company to scale back the DRM with a patch after a period of time (once the majority of sales have already been accomplished). My experience is that DRM gets in the way of the replay value of a game. Ubisoft's inclusion in Good Old Games shows that they are willing to accept DRM free for some of their older games but it is unclear if a patch to remove DRM from current or future games will be provided once the game is considered end of life. I think success stories such as the Humble Indie Bundle which collected $2 million dollars even while offering the option to download the games for free is an indication there exists a large number of gamers that want to pay for games and it is not the DRM that is causing them to do so.

munnu_87
09-03-2011, 02:48 AM
i need to know when will be the offline patch go on line? i am not connected to internet always and not defently while am playing. i bought this game last week and activated it. but cant play since i am not online. so please tell me a date!

chilinux
09-06-2011, 06:41 PM
Originally posted by munnu_87:
i need to know when will be the offline patch go on line? i am not connected to internet always and not defently while am playing. i bought this game last week and activated it. but cant play since i am not online. so please tell me a date!

According to Rock, Paper Shotgun, there already exists a "patched" version of the game:



The version available to pirates had the DRM removed from day one, so it was performing no service beyond providing a barrier between legitimate customers and the game.

It seems for anyone that is unwilling to wait for Ubisoft to get around to an official patch that this mess is actually *encouraging* using "pirates" as the method of support. Considering the game only costs $15, hopefully anyone who does play the game has either already payed of it or will pay for it regardless of the method used to get it. However, once Ubisoft indirectly encourages pirates to be the preferred way of support, will customers continue to buy Ubisoft's $50 titles or has pandora's box been open that much more from this?

I am astonished at the length to which Ubisoft continues to fail to communicate. After telling the media that the forums are not an unofficial channel of communications, they post their "official statement" to the same forums rendering the legitimacy of the statement void based on Ubisoft policy

Ubisoft has recently posted the statement to the game website blog with highlighted text of "approximately two weeks." While most blogs provide dates for each blog entry, the Ubisoft game blog does not.

So, the fully qualified statement from Ubisoft once provided through an official method of communications is:
"Our tech teams are working on a patch that should release in approximately two weeks [from unspecified date]..."

If you want to play the fool and trust yet another Ubisoft forum post as official just because the subject says it is then two weeks from August 22nd would be yesterday. So maybe sometime this week the patch will be pushed out or maybe not. Ubisoft is not exactly being clear on this topic.

If you are continuing to have problems playing the game then it is ultimately up to you if you wish to try to seek a refund or continue to wait. However, providing details such as an exact date a patch might be released on does not seem like something Ubisoft is offering at this time.

aljones15
09-06-2011, 09:30 PM
i
I just wanted to say I pre-ordered this game and can not play it via steam. This is with me putting the proxy port into the internet settings etc. I am a huge fan of ubisoft, but I can not believe that I have a game sitting in my account that I am physically unable to play. To deliver a product that literally doesn't work is just beyond any acceptability. I play pc games at pc bars in Asia using an external hard drive and steam. I can not change the firewall, I can not change what is on the on the pc in front of me, due to this I can not play a game I pre-paid for despite the fact that the game is actually there. I managed to play Assassin's Creed Brotherhood in offline mode, but every other game in my steam account is playable except this one.

Wasamonkey
09-07-2011, 05:58 PM
2 Weeks hits tomorrow, has anyone even heard of this actually getting patched on time or will there be another delay. I'm sitting in Afghanistan with one thing on my mind when I actually get a chance to get online... "WHY THE EFF CAN'T I PLAY THIS GAME OFF-LINE!?" I'll be here for a while so I'll have to wait. What choice do I have?... EPIC FAIL!

Aj6627
09-08-2011, 01:27 AM
Here's my two cents after reading through this debacle:
First of all, this is why we need PC specific forum managers/community managers/insulation from dev team'ers.

People who don't game on PC aren't as "in touch" (no offense Klean) with the current issues in PC gaming and the current technology and stuff. Until this happens, I'm sure these "confusions" will continue to occur every so often.

Second, this is why I coined the term "Fubied" about, oh, 5-6 years ago with the Double Agent debacle.

Finally, hopefully this turns more people away from Ubi's PC games. If they continue implementing their draconian DRM even after this incident, they are doomed to failure eventually. (which wouldn't be a bad thing, except where would the licenses for games go? EA? BAD! Activision? BAD!)


EDIT: I forgot to mention: Ubisoft support is virtually worthless for anything that requires actual thought. They just put out some barely-edited variation of a canned response and call it an answer to your problem. I have yet to see someone with a real problem get helped by them since I joined in 2002...

crazymalware
09-08-2011, 10:44 AM
Originally posted by Wasamonkey:
2 Weeks hits tomorrow, has anyone even heard of this actually getting patched on time or will there be another delay. I'm sitting in Afghanistan with one thing on my mind when I actually get a chance to get online... "WHY THE EFF CAN'T I PLAY THIS GAME OFF-LINE!?" I'll be here for a while so I'll have to wait. What choice do I have?... EPIC FAIL! ...I'd rather wait another week or two to get a high quality product... wouldn't it be better?

Methons
09-09-2011, 12:33 AM
since when was from dust a high quality product. i will be suprised if said patch goes of the way they say it will.

Cotton_n
09-13-2011, 02:54 PM
data execution prevention (DEP) is the problem for people having crashes during startup of this game, and it isnt the game that is the problem it is the Ubisoft Game launcher that is geting blocked by the DEP.

goinhydro
09-17-2011, 05:44 AM
i cant belive your charging money for this sh1t, f-you for cheating me out of my hard earned money

liveatlast91
08-23-2012, 09:42 PM
Hay check out my play through of From Dust. I only have part one up bet part 2 and 3 will be up later this week. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1o5DL901tw&feature=plcp