Ubisoft Learns Hitting Customers Over The Head And Calling Them Thieves Is Not Good Policy
from the better-late-than-never dept
For many years, Ubisoft has been the go-to company for stories about DRM gone horribly wrong. They really seemed to believe that always-on DRM actually does something to stop piracy. That was followed with story after story after story of Ubisoft doing things that harm only paying customers and generally shoot themselves in the foot. You can go back over our posts about the company to see just how badly they have handled piracy for years. It really looked like the company was never going to learn the simple fact that it is more important to maximize sales than to fight piracy. So imagine our surprise when the following story came to light.Ubisoft began making the rounds early this week, contacting a number of video game sites including Gamasutra and Rock, Paper, Shotgun and providing interviews. The purpose of these interviews? To tell the world that Ubisoft has changed its DRM ways. Much like the end of Charles Dickens' 'A Christmas Carol' in which Scrooge takes to the streets to spread peace and goodwill, Ubisoft wants the world to know that it believes that providing its customers with the best gaming experience is the most important part of its new strategy.
In the interview with Gamasutra, Ubisoft's VP of digital publishing Chris Early speaks about its past use of always-on DRM.
If you look back to early 2011 and before, we did at one point in time go with an always-on activation, for any game. We realized that while it was probably one of the strictest forms of DRM, it wasn't the most convenient for our customers. We listened to the feedback, and have removed that requirement from those games, and stopped doing that going forward.This is interesting because we had been complaining about always-online DRM since at least 2010 and other forms of Ubisoft DRM since 2006. However, the fact that they are actually listening to the feedback of consumers is a huge plus for them. This is a bold move for the company that decided that paying customers wouldn't miss playing their games at all for a few days while it moved its servers.
What we're trying to do is make [playing a game] easy for players who have legitimately bought our software, and at the same time put a registration requirement, or one-time activation requirement in, that includes some element of [software] protection.This is exactly what many customers have been asking for and many other successful companies have been giving. This idea that providing value to paying customers is a better way for success has been one that companies like Valve, Stardock and CD Projekt Red have known for years. But this lesson on DRM is not the only one that Ubisoft has learned.
The reality is, given enough time and effort, any game can be pirated, and many are. But what we're looking to do is validate the customer, then provide value to that customer for registering their software.
Ubisoft also seems to have learned some very important lessons about piracy in general. Specifically, that not all people pirating a game are doing so just to get free stuff and that not all pirated copies are a lost sale.
I don't believe that every single pirated copy is a lost sale. In some cases I'm sure it's just someone trying out a game. At some level, you can almost look at it as a demo program. So as far as many of those could've been sales? I'm not sure.This is another idea that other companies have known for a while, that piracy is the result of under-served customers. By focusing efforts on making the paid option more attractive than the free options, you can capture more sales than if you spent your time trying to stop piracy.
In general, when people talk about piracy, there are all kinds of reasons cited, whether it's because of an economic imbalance, where people can't afford to buy a game in that particular [geographical territory], or it's a challenge, or it's someone who doesn't believe in supporting publishers by giving them money. There's a whole variety of reasons. That's why we want to focus on the rewards and benefits of owning the software.
Over at RPS, They didn't go quite so easy on Ubisoft's representatives. RPS asked many times for a statement on just how bad its DRM was for paying customers and whether Ubisoft had any regrets, but all RPS ever got were whitewashed PR statements.
RPS: Do you acknowledge that always-on DRM has been extremely damaging to Ubisoft's reputation?This attitude of not wanting to admit to any mistakes while still making this sweeping change in policy has the potential to leave a lot of people with a bad taste in their mouths. While the company is no longer hitting their customers over the proverbial head, they have not yet apologized for those actions, at least not out right. A good apology could go a long way in smoothing things over with their past and future customers -- though perhaps just the act of changing and admitting to the change is a form of an apology for many.
Burk: I think that, as Stephanie said, I think this is where that feedback comes in. We've obviously heard from PC customers that they were unhappy with some of the policies that we had in place, and that's why we're looking to make these changes – why we have been implementing these changes, as Stephanie says.
RPS: Would you be willing to say that it was a mistake?
Burk: No, I wouldn't say that. I'll let Stephanie say what she thinks, but I wouldn't use those words. This is a process, and we listened to feedback.
Perotti: I would say the same.
Over all, this is a great move by one of the last hold outs in regards to video game DRM. While many other companies still require some form of DRM, none were quite so bad as Ubisoft in that regard. Hopefully, this change of heart will echo throughout the gaming industry and all developers will abandon efforts in the futile fight against piracy and instead focus on maximizing sales through added value for their customers. Ubisoft has a bright future ahead of itself on this path and I wish them all the best of luck.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: drm, video games
Companies: ubisoft
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
*cough*
As I've said, make a great game, and the money rolls in. Make a crappy game, then burden the hell out of it, and money stops regardless how well a future game is made.
As for the apology, I disagree it's needed. Once we, the gamers, established they were idiots for using DRM in the first place, we knew they were handicapped in the "forward thinking" department, so an apology is implied because we knew they'd come around.
If an apology is to be made, it should be for taking this long to figure it out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hopefully they also realise that there's a huge number of people they didn't hear from. People who just vowed never to buy another game from them. People who were deterred from even trying the game in the first place by friends or news reports from people who had already suffered. People who simply decided this was the last straw and it was this - not piracy - that caused them to stop buying mainstream PC games altogether.
It's one thing to field complaints from customers who bothered to do so, but they have a lot of sales lost where nobody bothered to contact them. However, I am glad to see that some people at the company at least realised that they needed to stop the "we lost sales - let's assume it's piracy and introduce new DRM!" cycle they were stuck in.
Time will tell whether they have actually learned this lesson, but most of the damage has already been done. It was far easier to lose customers than it will be to attract them back. Hopefully they will understand that attacking customers isn't the way to go in the used console game market, as some seem to think is the next battleground.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
This after demoing the game for free for about a month (and finding the extra "features" like ark upgrades worth paying for a few bucks at a discount).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It's hard to read them as a service provider, because they just quit, if you even get a chance to ask why, they will give you their reason, but they won't be screaming at you about their problem giving you the chance to deescalate the situation and provide the opportunity to win them back. They are easy to write off because they are not a nuisance to operating even though their effect is huge and nearly permanent without a near-monopoly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Now, I am not done with my boycott. But if Ubisoft puts action to their words, I might not turn the game off when I see Ubisoft next time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Majority of us are just done with Ubisoft.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
lolwhut
I feel like I'm in crazy land.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: lolwhut
But easier said then done. I'll hold my tongue till we see the next few releases. If this change of heart actually materializes then I sure as hell am going to praise them and maybe review my personal policy of never buying from them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: lolwhut
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hey! Ubisoft, while we have you in a sane moment, I'd like to put in another request. If you're going to localize, please please leave in the original language as an option.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
*grabs torches and pitchforks, organizes angry mob*
DIE MONSTER, YOU DON'T BELONG IN THIS WORLD!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
But yes, especially voice-acting is horrible if the target country is small (for obvious reasons).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Misson Control
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A great first step.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: A great first step.
I'd say that the level of piracy is really not an issue. The issue is the level of people buying the legit thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: A great first step.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Remember: Ubisoft already used a very invasive DRM mechanism called Starforce (which messed up your system really badly) extensively before. They only backed down huge backlash, promising to be nice in the future. And look what that got us.
We'll see if they learned anything, but I doubt it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I hope they don't expect their sales to just shoot up after this. It's going to take a long time for people to start to believe in them again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I'm sure they'll just lobby to put a tax on all software and data sold, because it could be DRM'd.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Piracy killing DRM industry
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
So DRM itself is being "pirated"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Yea, I can see the DRM industry lobbying for that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
But you are right about never getting an apology. Nobody from a company will ever admit they were wrong for fear of becoming the scapegoat when blame is placed.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Most of you couldn't even dream of that stuff, but they actually did it!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I'm an expert at torturing people. That's how I know I'd be ace at making DRM!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
We actually would appreciate if all that creativity went into making good games. Possibly that aren't the sequel of the sequel of the sequel [...] of the sequel. Or another first person shooter.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
... does this mean i might need a padded cell?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Instead of fucking with your CD burner it'll just fuck with your volume controls and force you to listen to this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Crocodile tears
Full stop.
Its' a step in the right direction perhaps, but without an admission of guilt, it is, ultimately, meaningless.
All they're saying is "Please buy the expensive new game(s) we have coming soon. We may or may not treat you like a criminal this time." I am expecting a very incomplete game, packaged with a one-time-use code to download/unlock "bonus content" that is really just the other 50% of the game that should've been included in the first place. Without a very public and very consumer friendly 180 turn-around, this "apology" does not even scratch the surface of my hard-hearted loathing for this company.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rarely you see someone that can put out such good games but then seem to be completely oblivious as to why people actually like the game and have let some very interesting titles and IPs just... die... because they refused to make changes that fans kept asking for.
If anything I'm shocked they finally came around on the DRM thing. Now if they would listen to forums on their next super interesting title that has easily fixed deal breakers in it...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Listening to Money
Some companies bend over backwards to please the customer and that may or may not result in immediate monetary rewards.
Others craft/change their policy based on market pressure. This is the waxing/waning of restrictions based on what the competition is doing and what the market will bear.
Apple is the master of this game. Lock it down until competition forces it to open. Demands of the users is irrelevant (using flash, multi-tasking on the iPhone, proprietary cables, etc, etc).
-CF
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
this isn't a real apology from ubisoft
In short, ubisoft is dipping the most miniscule inch of their toe into "let's not treat our customers like crap" water, but in reality - they still think the customers are at fault for daring to want to buy their products and not be treated like pirates.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What the Dickens?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What the Dickens?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
While I might now buy the next Ubisoft game, unfortunately it looks like I'm going to have to give the next SimCity a miss, which will be disappointing as it'll be the first SimCity I've not bought.
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/03/28/simcity-to-be-crippled-by-always-on-lets-change- this/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm sure they come with something as irritating soon enough.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Personally, I'll wait to see whether the actions match up with the words before they get more of my money. As somebody above said, I hope they realise that it's going to take a while for their customers to start to trust them again, even if this really does signal a major change in policy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That sounds horribly weak. Like "yeah, very perhaps once in a blue moon there might be a pirated copy that is not a missed sale."
Zachary has to bend that statement a lot to turn it into "Specifically, that not all people pirating a game are doing so just to get free stuff and that not all pirated copies are a lost sale.".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I don't trust them
I don't think this is over by a long shot. I think they will find a way to piss off the users even more.
I honestly don't trust them and they have a long long way to go before I even consider buying or even pirating a game from them.
I have other game companies to invest my money in who will treat me with some level of respect. As for the apology it won't matter either way if they do or do not. They have to earn a lot of people trust back before they can come back from this
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I think this change was based purely on looking at how much it was costing them to keep their always-on DRM infrastructure going vs. the lack of a drop in perceived piracy rate. I wouldn't be surprised if drops in sales had little to do with the decision (in Ubiland that is just more people flying the jolly roger).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Don't think for a moment it was about listening to the customer. It was about we're going bankrupt and if we want to keep making games, something is going to have to change.
Ubisoft has shown over and over they wouldn't listen to their customers for years. This isn't a sudden change in heart. It's trying to mend the hole in the pocket.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Still waiting on your evidence that he pirates...
"an under served customer, doesn't buy your product"
Oooh! You almost stumbled across the point!
That's exactly right, an underserved customer doesn't buy. But, you idiots assume that his only reason for not doing so is piracy. So, you increase the problems he experienced that stopped him from buying, in order to punish the pirate who wasn't buying in the first place. Another customer gets fed up, he stops buying, then you assume the reason is piracy and increase the DRM.
So long as you try to pretend that everybody who points out the massive problems with the industries you defend and try to pretend that everyone who doesn't bow down to this bullshit is a pirate, you're never going to recapture those "lost sales", and probably cause more of them.
"an under served customer doesn't steal your product, a pirate does, and then justifies it by any means they need"
...and the methods you use to try to punish him leads to more underserved customers who stop buying... Get it yet? Why not address the things that leave them underserved to begin with instead of this impossible vicious cycle?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I vowed never to buy a game or console again.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That is definately not true always.
You can find torrents to the Humble Indie Bundle, which is perhaps the most consumer-minded game deal ever invented. Piracy is certainly due to plain greed sometimes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I've vowed that Black Flag would be my last purchase from Ubisoft. It's much easier to vote with my wallet than trying to reason with them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]