Ubisoft have contacted us with an official statement regarding the hack earlier in the week which saw users gain access to the entire Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon game (and others) by using a simple text editor.

“We are aware of the issue and are working to resolve it quickly,” reads the official statement. “Uplay’s PC download service will be unavailable until the problem is fixed, but no personal information was compromised and all other Uplay services remain available.”

We’ll bring you further news as we have it.

Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon hasn’t even been announced for PC. There was a listing for it on the Steam database, but no release date (although a pulled XBLA listing claimed May 1). And yet, right now, you can open uPlay on your PC and trick it into downloading it for you. Then, you can play it to your heart’s content. Beginning to end.

This isn’t some half-assed beta. This is the full, finished game. It’s just sitting there on uPlay’s servers, waiting for the bigwigs to pull the switch.

Is this legal? Probably not. And just to be safe, I’m not going to tell you how to do it. By tomorrow morning Ubisoft will have fixed this exploit anyway. They’re not stupid, and in any case, that’s not the point.

The real point here is this: Ubisoft is off to a pretty poor start on its mission to improve its relationship with PC gamers.

This is a joke, right?

There are an enormous amount of areas where uPlay desperately needs to improve. We’ve documented them before. It’s a broken system, to the point where we recently had to spend 45 minutes figuring out how to set up and install some Assassin’s Creed III DLC (which, it turns out, contained only 90 minutes of play time anyway).

It’s a broken system that Ubisoft is even cramming into its Steam titles, forcing you to launch uPlay even when you’ve purchased your game through Steam — or even Origin! Why would I want to use one DRM system that launches another? Why would I want to have to maintain all these different friends lists?

And now, we’re seeing that this system is so broken — so completely broken — that players can actually manually tear the curtains aside, using something as simple as a text editor, and see what they’re not allowed to have. Or even take other games they haven’t paid for!

This is really, really, dumb. Why are we using uPlay again?

Don’t launch a half-baked product and force us to use it

I’ll be the first to argue that Ubisoft have the right, just as EA do, to invent and support their own digital marketplace and game management software. Steam is a middle man, and middle-men need to justify their existence. If a game’s publishers think they can do a better job in the age of the internet than the middle-man they used to sell through, then why shouldn’t they try? It’s madness to suggest otherwise, and if you ran Ubisoft, you’d do it too.

That’s fine, of course — in theory. But there’s no point in launching a service basically designed to steal customers from Steam if the end result is that you provide an experience objectively worse than Steam in every single way.

Ubisoft took a good step when it removed the always-online DRM requirement from its games. The company is to be congratulated for that. But just as having always-online DRM forced on us is unpalatable, so is having to use a system that simply doesn’t do its job.

The Streisand Effect

When videos of Blood Dragon started leaking this morning, Ubisoft just as quickly started to take them down. This, of course, didn’t work — a textbook example of the Streisand Effect in action or, if you prefer a more lowbrow explanation, “trying to take piss out of a pool”.

And, although Ubisoft can lock out Blood Dragon and make it so people won’t be able to play it any more (presumably), the damage here is done. The game’s files are in the open, and they’ll never come down from the internet again. It won’t be long before somebody figures out how to crack them and seventeen different torrents spring into existence.

The graceful way for the company to handle this would be turn around, to own this mistake, and to say “Whoops! Bad call on our part. Here’s all the information about Blood Dragon. We’ll be releasing the PC version on the same day as the console versions.”

I’d be very surprised if that’s what happens. In fact, I’d be very surprised if there’s an official comment on the matter at all.

PC gamers are sick of waiting for Ubisoft titles. Sometimes they’re day-and-date with the console versions — the simultaneous launch of Far Cry 3 for example was well handled — but Assassin’s Creed III players had to wait literally an entire month before they could get their hands on the game (and even then it was lacking in substantial graphics options).

It’s one thing to wait for a game, under the impression that it’s just not ready, or that the company is beavering away on it to make it extra special for your platform. But it’s another thing entirely to wait for a game, only to find out that it’s completely 100% ready and you just… can’t have it. Why? What does this mean? Was Assassin’s Creed III sitting on uPlay’s servers the entire 30 days PC gamers had to wait for it, and all we needed was a text editor to unlock it?

Now is the time

We’ve already outlined here on games.on.net the number of ways we think Ubisoft needs to lift its game, and our commenters have done the same countless times. This anger with Ubisoft’s practices is born not out of misplaced entitlement, but out of simple frustration: we like Ubisoft games. Far Cry 3 was balls-out fun. Assassin’s Creed III was great (mostly). Watch Dogs is looking amazing.

We’re just frustrated because the relationship seems so one-sided. We love these games, and we want to play them — but we have to deal with this utterly broken uPlay framework, and this arms-length treatment. It doesn’t make PC gamers feel wanted, and it doesn’t make us feel like our relationship is improving.

Today’s episode with Blood Dragon has the potential to be a turning point in that relationship — for better or worse. Ubisoft needs to step up and deal with this, before it turns sour.

Over the last few years Ubisoft has replaces a number of formerly vilified publishers to become the PC gamer’s antagonist of choice, with its – shall we say, unpopular? – DRM practices; delayed or absent PC releases for multiplatform titles; and shoddy ports. Its Uplay service is often resented as an unnecessary extra step of authentication, and its extension to third-party titles hasn’t gone down very well.

Worldwide director Stephanie Perotti says the publisher is aware of feedback and working hard to win back gamers’ trust by providing an alternative to existing digital distributors.

“Announcing all these partners for Uplay and a wider choice of PC games, it shows our commitment to PC, and we want to improve our relationship with the PC community,” she told MCV.

“We are always seeking to improve. We took a lot of that feedback on board. With every game on PC we are improving. Far Cry 3 and Assassin’s Creed III on PC were very high quality.”

I don’t think you can have too much choice. It is just another way to expose more content. At Uplay we are also offering all Ubisoft titles, more console content and elements that gamers are more interested in. It’s about offering more options and more choice.”

Source: MCV

In a surprising twist, today Ubisoft and EA agreed to use each others’ digital delivery platforms to sell each others’ various games. Presumably coming together in a concerted effort to make Steam less appealing, the two publishers will now work together rather than trying to cut each others’ lunch.

In fact, Ubisoft is opening its doors to all manner of third-party developers for the first time, including Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment, 1C Company, bitComposer Games, Bohemia Interactive, Encore Software, Focus Home Interactive, Freebird Games, Iceberg Interactive, Nordic Games, Paradox Interactive, Recoil Games, Robot Entertainment, Telltale Games, and Torn Banner Studios.

There’s no word on whether or not installing an EA game through uPlay will require you to launch Origin, or if buying an Ubisoft game through Origin will mean firing up uPlay anyway. Hopefully not, as that would be… well, the word “horrific” springs to mind.

Source: Press Release

DRM is one of the most controversial issues faced by avid PC gamers, attested to by the almost daily debates in our forums and our article comment threads. From the games that require always-on internet connections and registered accounts, to the content management platforms we now rely on to serve us new titles and keep older ones automatically updated, it’s obvious that we’re now stuck with it — at least in some form — for the near future.  

Judging by the temperature of the discussions that surround the subject, we’re pretty goddamn upset about its proliferation — yet many of us actively choose to continue using it in the face of alternatives. Even titles that offer DRM-free downloads are quickly eclipsed by requests for Steam codes, citing convenience, a single point of storage and the aforementioned game maintenance services that are on offer. So, putting the vitriol aside for a moment, do DRM-based systems offer features that could actively be useful in our lives?

Before we can answer this question, however, we need to highlight exactly what DRM consists of and, frankly, why it exists in the first place. At its core, DRM regulates the licenses you hold for particular titles, in the same way CD-Keys once did during the nineties. Instead of being scattered throughout boxes, they’re stored in a centralized database linked to a single user, making it easier to authenticate repeat installs and connect various portions of products together. But lets not be entirely naive — the prime reason for much of this consolidation is to prevent multiple, simultaneous uses of software, in order to stem what publishers see as rabid piracy of PC titles.

But what’s more interesting than the reality is the flawed perception of good and bad.

Why does Steam get a free pass…

Steamworks (or rather, just “Steam”), originally developed by Valve in order to maintain and secure its own library of titles, has quickly spawned into the most popular form of digital rights management for both PC and Mac titles. Most, if not all, PC gamers would have it installed and hold within it a host of cheap titles sourced from the various sales that are now held regularly. What I find most interesting about the whole DRM debate is the defense of Steam compared to the lambasting of an almost identical platform in Origin. People seem keen to gloss over the many disabling functions in Steam that would be considered draconian if (and when) done by anyone else.

Steam’s region-specific systems allow for the ability to introduce price discrimination, release date limitation and “blocking” of content publishers feel they do not want to be sold in a territory. It has a policy of banning full accounts, in turn blocking access to full lists of titles, for minor indiscretions, such as using a VPN or gifting a title from another region. Support systems are woeful and authentication issues arise often preventing access to titles, both on and offline.

In its defense, Steam does make a conscious effect to overcome many of the restrictions imposed by its publisher clients, in order to create an environment that is comfortable for gamers. You can go offline, and play titles without a connection at LAN or if you’ve been capped. Titles not only update automatically, but alert you to new features, DLC and modifications. Each title now includes its own self-contained community, allowing discussion of game or technical problems. An enormous marketplace with relatively little barrier to entry means a plethora of indie titles, F2P games, betas and even alphas that can utilize the existing user base, security of code and self-maintenance to release regular builds and prevent the stemming of vital funds to piracy (which is significantly more common within smaller sized indies than larger AAA’s). Coupled with a breadth of social functions, friends lists, server browser and so forth, its generally the only piece of software you need to have.

It’s this convenience and clever masking of restrictions that dilute much of the anger around having them at all. Steam’s terms of use are generally no more restrictive than Origin’s, or even uPlay’s, but the offense stems from visibly “needing” more than one client installed. Ignoring the fact that having a single client usually removes the need for others (most internet-enabled titles in the early years usually installed Gamespy or some other utility to handle updates or multiplayer), players are now so used to Steam that any other contender is almost instantly deemed irrelevant or useless, regardless of utility.

…especially when the competition is no better

Origin, in most cases, offers many of the same functions as Steam — although they are still, much as Valve once was the only client of its own software, limited to EA. There is an offline mode for downloaded titles, access to betas and free games, sales, a friends list, automatic updates, and in most cases, very fast downloading. Sure, there isn’t the entrenched legacy of content providers, but this was namely due to games that used to run on dedicated machines run by ISPs, as is (sadly) not the norm today.

Conspiracy theories aside, Origin’s DRM is in no way more or less draconian than Steam’s, so much of the annoyance stems from client specific restrictions, such as SimCity or Battlefield 3, that requires a secondary login and constant, unwavering connection to its parent server. It’s in this area that the cauldron is brewing about when single-player games become multiplayer-only games, with Blizzard leading the charge of adding always-on features to StarCraft 2 and Diablo 3, causing a plethora of outrage for some and little change for others. But what seems to be missing from the current conversation around the future of how we play games, and how they are protected, is a proper and consistent explanation from developers.

Diablo 3 held a contentious position with the declaration by its developers that it had now become an MMO-lite, yet many of the changes to the formula in order to keep it this way were almost outright rejected by its community. StarCraft 2, on the other hand, has benefited from a single ecosystem that combined updates, ladders, mods, maps and co-op play into a single unit, and thus become embraced by its base.

uPlay, easily one of the most hated content management platforms, is a perfect example of why a good set of simple features within a usable UI can disguise many of the unappetizing ones. uPlay is downright terrible to use, even after the multitude of changes the software has undergone since its inception. It’s slow, convoluted, relies on external installers for software and does not keep track of updates or client changes. It has a dreadful friends list with a full-screen overlay that drastically effects game performance when opened. uPlay, in fact, exists almost primarily to control a license and this is where it fails – there is very little value add here.

Everything is exposed in uPlay, and to an even greater extent with the abysmal Games For Windows Live. You can visibly see all of the gears turning, with the multiple windows begging for this code or that, the show stopping errors when connections are lost or lagged, or when crucial authentication systems go down, preventing you from playing something that literally requires no connection whatsoever. Steam removes all of the gears from view, and when it does need to expose some of the engine room, it ensures that everything is covered in enough shiny metal that you don’t even notice the smell.

We’ll take the stick, but we need the carrot

If you are going to remove freedoms, you must replace them with something tangible. Realising this, uPlay recently added the unique ability to convert points earned from achievements in game, towards extra content, such as wallpapers or even DLC. It does work well, and its a good start towards a system that could compete with the likes of Steam or Origin, but not until it puts all of its ducks in a row, and comes help rather than a hindrance.

Ever so slowly, publishers are realizing that they can get away with murder once they offer enough bells and whistles — like speed, community and reliability. Once you’ve hidden the corpse and silenced the critics, human nature dictates that people are quick to forget that the crime occurred and will move on with their lives.

If publishers want to make DRM more palatable to the gaming public, they don’t have to remove it — they need to incentivise it. The gaming public has already demonstrated that they will reluctantly use it, even after complaining about it, because they want the game behind the mess. But if you want to retain users for your platform, then you need to ensure that there is a net benefit to the person having to put up with the inconvenience  The reason people are actually choosing to use Steam over DRM-free software is because it’s effortless, full of choice and aims to actively improve its use and offerings.

Origin, for its faults, is making efforts to do the same, emulating a lot of what has made Steam so successful. Gamers have already decided they are willing to trade off the odd freedom, but convenience just isn’t enough anymore — if publishers want people to make the switch, there better be something even better waiting for them at the other end.

Ubisoft desperately want their Uplay platform to take off, and it makes sense; why advertise another company’s store-front when you could have one all your own? Why merely share in your profits when you could reap the entire amount for yourself? In theory this sounds like a reasonable justification, but in practice it seems that companies have yet to learn that competing with Steam is a tough row to hoe, and that their legitimate customers are the ones yoked to the plough.

1. Uplay or Steam. Not both.

Uplay’s first and most egregious misstep is that it is a secondary and inferior DRM hurdle for customers purchasing Ubisoft titles via Steam. If you wish to have your copy of Assassin’s Creed III or Far Cry 3 listed alongside the rest of your Steam game collection, you’ll have to put up with jumping through both Steam and Uplay’s hoops to get to the content that you have rightly paid for.

Not only do you have to be signed into Steam, but you also need to have Uplay running to be able to play. It would be fairly safe to assume from comments made by Ubisoft leading up to the release of these titles that this situation was the compromise reached jointly with Valve to get ACIII and FC3 listed on Steam.

2. Implement a Redeem Code feature.

Steam’s snappy, intuitive, and almost utilitarian user interface plays a major part in users’ support of the platform. Uplay, on the other hand, makes a number of mistakes when it comes to ensuring that users feel comfortable and confident as they navigate through their catalogue of Ubisoft purchases. For one, there is no obvious Redeem Code feature listed in the application. This means that users need to either install their disk-based games, or wait for the painfully slow and completely separate from Uplay retail downloader to put their files in place before Uplay will acknowledge their purchases. The Redeem Code feature is designed to eliminate the gap between sale payment and fulfilment, a fretful and confidence-fraying period for customers trying a service for the first time. The fact that the service does not make it clear how to associate your purchases with your account is not a great first impression.

3. Make updates secondary to gameplay.

Steam has made many advances in getting out of the user’s way, and one of the most notable examples is its ability to apply updates in the background. This means that it is far more likely that your games will be updated and ready to go when you’re ready to play.

Uplay has no such feature. It checks for updates when you attempt to run a game. This means that if an update exists, you must waste precious gaming time waiting for it to be downloaded and applied. Implementing a background update process is more complex than it sounds, but a quick stop-gap measure would be for the check to apply on exit, so that the update can be applied between gaming sessions rather than delaying your current one.

4. Gracefully handle the movement of game files.

At the time of writing, it isn’t possible to move your installed games from one location to another without reinstalling them completely. If Uplay loses access to a documented installation location, it will not associate itself with those files again unless you reinstall the game from scratch. Thankfully if you bought your games on disk, this process doesn’t take long, but if you bought the game from their download service, look forward to another game-sized hole in your monthly data cap.

5. Back Uplay points with quality content.

The one truly good idea buried amongst all of this Uplay cruft is the Uplay Points system. Associating some actual value to achievement points is genuinely exciting — finally, something you can do with those achievements! Unfortunately, the content on offer for users to spend their Uplay points on has been almost uniformly sub-par. If Ubisoft instead made some high-quality content available for purchase with Uplay points, perhaps some of their paid DLC or even physical items, statues, tchotchkes and the like, they would have one major selling point over Steam.

Admittedly, it has taken a number of years for Steam to reach its current dominant position on PC. There have been dark times, many of us are still trying to forget the horrors of the Half-Life 2 launch, and so it may be unfair to compare the two. That said, Ubisoft are clearly attempting to position Uplay as a competitor to Steam, and thus will naturally invite such comparisons. Sadly, they still have a long way to go to match the disappointing EA Origin service on a platform level.

Ubisoft’s Uplay doesn’t exactly have a good rep with PC gamers already due to its tendency to go down at key times and leave gamers unable to play their games – but it’s about to get even worse. Late last night it was revealed that Ubisoft’s Uplay software came unwittingly packaged with a gaping backdoor: a browser plugin that Uplay installs into your computer during setup.

This browser plugin could theoretically be used to execute nearly any program through Uplay – indeed, adventurous users on the Ubisoft forums themselves quickly discovered they could quickly write scripts that used Uplay to launch Windows Calculator and other programs – and as such we’re being warned to update our Uplay software immediately.

Ubisoft jumped on the news quickly and have issued the following statement: “We have made a forced patch to correct the flaw in the browser plug-in for the Uplay PC application that was brought to our attention earlier today. We recommend that all Uplay users update their Uplay PC application without a Web browser open. This will allow the plug-in to update correctly. An updated version of the Uplay PC installer with the patch also is available from Uplay.com.” Many users are uninstalling completely until the problem can be verified as fixed, which might be a reasonable precaution.

Source: Rock, Paper, Shotgun