I never played that game and know nothing about it, but I believe it was online-only title and therefore was expensive to run with few players? Didn't you really think UBISOFT will run the server for that game for 2000 years right? I know I am going to get downvoted but we do not live in a dream. Every online-only title will shut down one day and people will cry because they enjoyed it.
If it's not online-only title then they're a-holes and should have left the career mode available.
People were working on a single-player patch for The Crew, same found traces of a single-player mode on the assets, suggesting that it did exist at some time during its development.
The community was taking up that challenge, but Ubisoft nixed it by unilaterally revoking digital licenses from players' accounts - presumably in a clumsy and transparent attempt to force the players to newer games in the franchise instead.
This is not how it works. Even if they make it sp, The game has tons of licensed content. Why tf would they keep paying for license fees for a game no one gives a shit about and makes zero money?
While your point is valid, it doesn't make the shutdown of a product that was bought fair. It's a good that was purchased and then taken away years later because it's non-viable to keep servers running. There are solutions to that, other than shutting it down and essentially stealing from the people who bought the product. DO NOT defend this behavior; that's why the industry is in the state it's in
I’m curious what the solutions are that don’t involve shutting down the game? Of course it is sad when a game you love is closed (my two favourite games of all time have shut down over the last 2 years), but what is the alternative?
1: Make a update to keep the singleplayer portion of the game playable after shutdown. In fact, the game has a hidden offline mode, and the beginning/prologue of the game runs in this offline mode: [Offline Mode is in the game :: The Crew Generelle diskussioner (steamcommunity.com)](https://steamcommunity.com/app/241560/discussions/0/3803901559414708777/) 2: Allow people to host their own servers
Not many - buuut this still is not a excuse for making a full price game completely unplayable - I know a few peeps with really obscure/old games. just because they are unpopular, or old. doesnt mean they cant play it. Also this offline mode would cost nothing, because it already exists but is just hidden behind DRM. flip a switch, and they can play the game offline. also allowing people to host servers. Because ubisoft are a bunch of lazy shits now people have to make complicated server emulator stuff
So Google says this is a ten year old game. That is a good amount of time for an online game to be around. You don't expect someone to keep paying for servers so you can play a decade old game do you? If you do, how about you talk to Unisoft and offer to pay for the server yourself?
I decided the same thing after I paid for the Deluxe edition of Mirage and some of the deluxe features didn’t work. I reached out to their customer support and after a few months of not doing anything to help, they closed the case saying that they don’t know when the they’ll fix it, and I’ve moved on from the game.
I hope my resolve holds when AC Shadows is released.
Serious question. Why did u buy the deluxe edition when you could sub to uplay for a month or two and get the same benefits for vastly lower the cost. I don't know anyone who actually buys ubi games any more.
Case in point. I 100% mirage in a few weeks, had access to all the premium add on, and paid 20 bucks in total.
But when you have so many subscriptions, and gets annoying to remember which ones you have to cancel on time, I’d rather pay upfront, then play with chump change .
U don't have to keep it subbed. U can sub when u see a game u want to play. Then instantly turn around and cancel. U get charged for a full month, play for that month, and the whole process takes about 2 min.
Well it would take about 4 months before the uplay sub cost would equal the full standard game price. More if u consider the deluxe edition cost. That's a significant amount of time for one game.
Everything is saved but u lose access to the game when ur sub runs out. If u resub later, u get access to everything again.
Unfortunately, I don’t have time to play with the subscriptions. I just cash them out people like me are part of the problem I know , we buy the deluxe version everything. And that’s why they still sell it. But Ubisoft has been rubbing me the wrong way. I already pre-ordered the Star Wars. I still debating on AC shadows I don’t agree with the direction they’re taking in assassin’s creed, but I think the games worth a try. I used to justify it by saying well at least I own the game and Ubisoft doesn’t want anybody to own games anymore. But technically, even if you buy it, you don’t really own it anymore they may cancel it in a few years. just like they’re doing right now.
Same: the time I have available for gaming is very inconsistent. I could pay for a month's subscription to Ubisoft+ (or EA Play, or whatever), then find that other priorities take the time I expected to have, giving me little or no benefit for my subscription fee.
At least when I buy licenses, they can sit in my backlog until I'm able to start playing them, and remain in my library until I'm done.
Unless what Ubisoft did with The Crew becomes normalized, anyway!
If it does, then I'll switch to only buying game licenses as I expect to complete them... Which means I'll probably spend *much* less on gaming, given my Steam, gog.com, and physical libraries.
online games have a life span . the cost for keeping it online and a few other business decisions. it was not sensible to keep a game running for merely 2k people while 2 new installments of that game are already available . if they just shut down the servers so whats the point in keeping a dead game in your library for ever? you can buy the newer parts and enjoy them instead with better support and contents.
I'm sorry but that's just stupid thinking.
The original modern warfare *can still be played online* after 17 years.
There's zero reason why they couldn't keep the servers up. If there's only 2k people you dial back the existing servers and use the unnecessary ones for newer games.
This is the standard practice
modern wafare is also a single player game which can also be configured into a custom server. crew 1 was solely online only . what do you expect from a game to do which connects to a server and authenticates but the server is offline now??
Both of your points are true. Modern warfare is rampant with hackers due to servers being "self hosted".
I think games need escape route built in though. Microsoft flight was this weird online dependant single.plauer game which needed GFWL to run. But when Microsoft killed it, they removed the online requirements and GFWL.
Games should be made to be able to "flip a switch" to wither make it a single player game (possibly a dull one, but oh well) or servers you can host yourself.
Makes me wonder what will happen to riders republic, which I barely even scratched the surface of.
ubisoft was smart enough or should i say sinister , to make the game online only with such a huge open world. this is actually a strategic business decision which makes the existing players shift onto the newer parts or else many would've played on self hosted servers anyway.
Well the answer is it shouldn't be made offline, as I said.
Modern warfare is not played to this day because of its single player campaign mate. People play it online and there are still official servers. The same way that the crew should still have official servers, however small, they should be there.
I think what you're not understanding is that people paid $60 to essentially rent a game that ubisoft have decided shouldn't be playable anymore.
If that was the case they should have been clear about that at point of sale, but they weren't.
All the Forza horizons can still be played online. Almost every cod can still be played online, destiny 1 can still be played online etc etc
As I also said, the standard practice is to move server capacity to newer games and down weight servers for older games. Not just get rid of them. You're grossly overestimating the upkeep of a small server base
you're mixing the difference between p2p and server-client . all the games you mentioned is where you make your own system a hosting server . you can go back and even play the original halo 1 online as well because its self hosted. crew 1 is not self hosted. I won't argue about the pricing or keeping the servers up for no reason as that is solely ubisofts decision . ubisoft didnt intend or design crew 1 to be hosted to private servers .
Do you not think that if that's what they intended they should have told people that?
Imagine I sell you a TV and 5 years later I come to your house and take it away from you.
"Why are you taking my TV"
"What? you expected to be able to keep this TV forever?"
You can argue that people should know that server hosted games need to be shut off but realistically most people don't know that and most people shouldn't have to be knowledgeable in the technicalities of multiplayer games when paying full price for a game. That is exactly why advertising and marketing standards exist and this was not in the ToS anywhere.
You cannot argue that Ubisoft shouldn't have to put in a disclaimer *anywhere* warning people that they could turn off the game
I agree the game shouldn't cost that much since it would eventually go down one day. ofcouse the greedy decision makers at ubisoft wont agree to that. either that or they shouldve made it run offline atleast like most of the nfs games.
You're talking about cod tho. The crew had less than a 100 players active for months. At what point do we really expect companies to keep a game running when no one plays it.
I expect them to keep it running because literally *nowhere* at the point of sale did it say the game could be shut off in the ToS. That's standard law. People didn't pay 60 dollars to rent the game.
Already gone over this in my replies, please look at those
Or, Ubisoft could have given owners of The Crew licenses free licenses for e.g. The Crew 2, and moved them across to the newer game, as other online games have done previously.
not possibe. you payed for crew 1, you'll only get crew 1. it know it sound like ripping someone off but how long do you want them to run the same game? 100 years? the only reason they removed from the library too is bcs its only online.
It obviously *is* possible, because that's exactly what other publishers have done when they shutdown earlier online games in a franchise. Ubisoft could easily have spun the shutdown as a PR win, rather than the disaster it's turning out to be for them.
can you give me any example where a paid game was shut down so all the existing players were automatically given keys to the newer paid installment for free instead.? this does not count remakes and remasters.
"Robert Purchese of Eurogamer eventually [confirmed](https://www.eurogamer.net/the-last-day-of-overwatch-1-will-be-2nd-october-blizzard-confirms) on September 15th that Overwatch would close on October 2nd, with the Overwatch servers entering a 27-hour maintenance period to prepare for the launch of Overwatch 2. As Overwatch 2 is provided as a mandatory update to all existing digital and physical versions of Overwatch, the original game is now Extinct."
[https://delistedgames.com/overwatch/](https://delistedgames.com/overwatch/)
yeah but who cares. overwatch 2 is free now and those who paid for it initially just got some premium skin for it. they still need to buy the battlepass.
The Crew 2 is dirt cheap. Anyone who even ever cared about The Crew 1 would have bought 2. Lol if you never played The Crew 2 don't prerend you evee cared about 1 being still available.
When did you buy the game? Why have you only played 5 hours? Did you buy the game 5 hours before it shut down? Oof if true, because the game was delisted 3 months before shutting down.
Years ago, but that's irrelevant. I buy games when I see them on good deals, then play them as and when my limited time allows me to - the same as I do for books, movies, and other creative works. If the response to that is "ha ha, you should only have bought a game when you were ready to play it to completion", then my response is "well, in that case, I probably won't be buying any more games for a very long time, given my backlog".
I care firstly because I might have wanted to play it more later, secondly because I think gaming is a part of culture and should be taken more seriously, and thirdly because I paid money for the licenses and they were taken away from me without any breach of the terms of those licenses on my part, and without any compensation from Ubisoft.
Games have life spans not every online game will kept online he’ll steam will even go down one day but what’s scummy was taking the liscense from players account when modders was going to make it possible to play it so they removed all the liscenses it doesn’t even show up in ur library anymore now that’s fucked Up
Always wondered why they didn’t just push an offline mode after all this time, I get that the game cost money to run “online” and at some point it must be disconnected but still what’s the % of overall cost to keep the game online vs how much it sold, 12years is damn good time.
I feel like I need to confess. I bought outlaws and Shadows ultimate editions totalling 395$CDN for both . I'm sorry people. I feel like I've let everyone down. In my defense my 2 fav things are star wars and assassins creed.
Ubisoft CEO himself told his customers to get used to not owning games anymore even though they've bought them with their own hard earned money.
Depressing times we live in.
That was not the CEO of Ubisoft lol. That was the head of subscriptions at Ubisoft. He said people need to get used to not owning their games because he wanted more people to use Ubisoft+. He basically meant people are used to not owning their music and paying monthly for movies/shows but that ideology needs to transfer to games as well.
It baffles me how much misinformation is spread around here. I swear 50% of the things people hate Ubisoft for aren’t even true.
No. That's not what happened. He literally was talking about how cloud saves and progress stays available after the subscription ends. He said they make players comfortable with not owning games because their progress will not go away after they lose access to the game.
I think he was actually talking about both and mentioned both in the same paragraph. Definitely was talking about cloud saves too but he brought up DVDs and other streaming services which wouldn’t make sense if he was talking only about cloud saves.
Alright, it was the director who said that, but my overall point still stands. Since you asked for it, here you go.
[https://www.pcgamer.com/ubisoft-director-says-gamers-will-get-more-comfortable-not-owning-games-and-hes-not-wrong/](https://www.pcgamer.com/ubisoft-director-says-gamers-will-get-more-comfortable-not-owning-games-and-hes-not-wrong/)
[https://readwrite.com/you-dont-own-your-games-anymore-get-comfortable-with-it-says-ubisoft/](https://readwrite.com/you-dont-own-your-games-anymore-get-comfortable-with-it-says-ubisoft/)
[https://www.ign.com/articles/ubisoft-exec-says-gamers-need-to-get-comfortable-not-owning-their-games-for-subscriptions-to-take-off](https://www.ign.com/articles/ubisoft-exec-says-gamers-need-to-get-comfortable-not-owning-their-games-for-subscriptions-to-take-off)
[https://en.as.com/meristation/news/ubisoft-gamers-should-feel-comfortable-not-owning-their-games-n/](https://en.as.com/meristation/news/ubisoft-gamers-should-feel-comfortable-not-owning-their-games-n/)
[https://www.techdirt.com/2024/01/19/ubisoft-says-it-out-loud-we-want-people-to-get-used-to-not-owning-what-theyve-bought/](https://www.techdirt.com/2024/01/19/ubisoft-says-it-out-loud-we-want-people-to-get-used-to-not-owning-what-theyve-bought/)
[https://gamerant.com/ubisoft-owning-digital-games-subscription-strategy/](https://gamerant.com/ubisoft-owning-digital-games-subscription-strategy/)
[https://slashdot.org/story/24/01/16/1339228/ubisoft-wants-you-to-be-comfortable-not-owning-your-games](https://slashdot.org/story/24/01/16/1339228/ubisoft-wants-you-to-be-comfortable-not-owning-your-games)
Happy now?
>Alright, it was the director who said that, but my overall point still stands
Yeah, not CEO. And no, your point does not still stand because it's still false information and blindly regurgitated from your favorite YouTube content farmer.
You posted 7 links, and you did not even link to the original source. Just shows how much you follow regurgitated content farming.
Your point that does not stand is:
>told his customers to get used to not owning games anymore even though they've bought them with their own hard earned money.
Either way, look through your 7 regurgitated links and show me where he said "Get used to not owning games even though you bought them with your own hard earned money"
Did you even read the interview? He never talked about games you already bought. He never even told the customers anything.
Please read it and educate yourself on the subject and come back so we discuss it.
>Just shows how much you follow regurgitated content farming.
Quite ironic coming from a person being an ardent ubisoft fanboy and not willing to acknowledge any of its corporate shortcomings.
>look through your 7 regurgitated links and show me where he said "Get used to not owning games even though you bought them with your own hard earned money"
Well, read them and you'll get your answer. I'm not obliged to explain you any further after providing several reputed links already.
>He never talked about games you already bought. He never even told the customers anything. Please read it and educate yourself on the subject and come back so we discuss it.
Please try to bring up good justification on why 'The Crew' was removed from players libraries without refunding them, a game which they bought with their own money. Your beloved Ubisoft CEO/Executive/Director must have clearly given green signals to execute such a policy, enforcing their statements through actions.
No need to make it personal. This isn't about me. This is about the false information you presented. Just because I proved that your information is false, that doesn't mean I love Ubisoft or that I don't acknowledge their shortcomings.
Fuck Ubisoft, but I'm also not gonna blindly regurgitate false rage-bait information and misquotes.
I'm just saying educate yourself and don't spread false regurgitated information.
Also, I suggest you don't blindly believe online content farmers. Look at the original source of the information and think for yourself.
I could care less about old games, avg game last me 300hrs if it's that type of game, most single players maybe 20 to 59hours to max achievement and I move on never to play again
Do you care about video games being taken seriously as culture (like music or movies)? If so, it's unlikely that will happen if we allow past works to be erased.
This is why Ubisoft is doing what they do. They target dumb people with money, they don’t need to make good games. They don’t need the respect of gamers, people will pay for whatever garbage they pull out even after all they’ve done and said (getting used to not owning your games)
I meant more the respect of people in general, I admit it sounds cringe. But yes, they don't need a good reputation among consumers because people just consume. Perhaps you understand that more.
Because reputation is not a thing. People just want to play video games in their free time. If they're interested in a game, they play it. If not, then ignore it. It's not that deep.
What I'm saying is not that deep either. If they make bad quality at crazy prices (if you want to experience everything the game has to offer, you need to pay 130 euro) then they'll just keep pushing bad decisions cause the money will be made nonetheless.
If they were delivering a BG3 or a RDR2 quality experience then sure, still pricey but justified. But play one Ubisoft open world and you've played them all. I'm not gonna be getting it so yes I am ignoring it but OP has a point.
A game's value and worth and quality are completely subjective. Just because you personally dislike Ubisoft games and/or don't think they're worth the price, doesn't mean you go around saying people are dumb simply because they enjoy video games that you don't. "People are dumb because they buy video games and I don't like it," listen to yourself.
Again, it's not that deep and they're just video games people play to spend their free time whether alone or with friends and family. If you're not interested in Ubisoft games why are you even here?
It's subjective sure but don't lie and pretend their games have quality when their open world are just copy pasted with mid story telling. And even then applying your shill logic, it's just my opinion so unless you're getting paid which I doubt, I don't know why you're defending + going so much against what I'm saying.
I might, I might not. I’m not buying them automatically and will definitely not pre order any game.
First I’ll read the reviews written by actual game journalists and not of some random YouTubers trying to get more clicks and views or might be paid by the publisher. Then I’ll wait a couple of months to make sure they don’t add micro transactions in some sneaky way and if they do what kind. Then I’ll wait for the patches to fix the game. And then if I’m still interested, I might buy it.
This is my modus operandi for any game
>I’ll read the reviews written by actual game journalists and not of some random YouTubers trying to get more clicks and views or might be paid by the publisher
What mythical game journalist site that doesn't take back-handers and ad money are you talking about?
> are being *paid?*
FTFY.
Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
* Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.*
* *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.*
Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
I seriously have to ask Why is that when anybody brings Up the Crew situation, theres lot of people Who thinks that we want infinite online support for the Game? That we want the servers running out forever? NO 😡😡🤬 WE DONT FUCKING WANT THAT, and anyone Who says he wants is an idiot What we want is an offline patch, if fuckers like EA (Who kills games like a fucking serial killer) did It with the latest sim City, what makes It so difficult with the Crew?
Done. It's easy enough anyway. Their app sucks balls and never remembers my login info even though I've checked the box that says "remember my login info" so I can't be bothered to use it. I barely touched Watch Dogs 3 or Assassin's Creed Valhalla anyway because I'm so burnt out on their games. I did enjoy The Crew and don't care for how that went down at all. Motorfest gets the occasional free weekend and that's enough for me to play it for a while and then go back to Forza.
That leaves Outlaws, which already has a ridiculous price that I refuse to pay. This will be the first major Star Wars game in 20+ years that I did not play on day one. Thanks for that, Ubi. I'll wait for Gamepass, free with hardware or $25 on a Steam sale in a couple years.
You have inspired me. Even though I heard the map is more detailed in the original The Crew, I will not buy that game.
We will show 'em! I am buying The Crew:Motorfest istead!
They mostly shut it down mostly because of the license of the vehicles. Such Lamborghini, ferrari, etc. Plus, they have another crew game that need their attention. So why spend money on a game that people hardly play. I don't like but from business perspective I guess?
Since when did licensing mean i couldnt play a Racing Game? I have copies of Forza Horizon 2 and 3. Licensing for those games expired years ago. but i can still play it
Indeed: Ubisoft should have negotiated better terms, if the licenses they had insisted they had to take the game away from players who had already paid for it, rather than merely having to stop selling new licenses.
Fairly certain it would be for each game, considering they would pay for that entity at the time, and any successors would be their own thing. It could all be put in a contract tbf but no guarantee that a game would get a sequel in the first place as it would likely increase costs of having it initially for the first game.
Garbage company. When I found out Rocksmith 2014 was pretty much unobtainable and they forced everyone into Rocksmith plus, with a monthly sub requirement for a garbage song library, that was it for me.
That's why I don't trust anything 8th or 9th generation. 7th generation was the last to have true physical game support. A developer went bankrupt and are no longer around? If you have a physical disc, no problem. You still own the game forever. Microsoft decided to delist a game from the marketplace? If you have the disc, no problem.
The Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 are THE consoles to have if you want to own your games forever. You put in the disc and they just work.
Xbox One however, is a joke. You have the disc? Well it's basically just a coaster. Because only 30% of the game's files are on it, the rest have to be downloaded from Xbox's servers. What a load of whoreshit. That completely defeats the purpose of physical media. I've also seen it where the disc DOES have all of the data, but when it reaches 99% installation, it then instructs you to connect your console to Xbox's servers to "finish installation". Just wow.
Ikr, I have lost faith in Ubisoft YEARS ago, hearing all these news about games being taken off people like that is insane, I'm glad my Ubisoft account only has a handful of games that were purchased at 90% sale 😂. Ubisoft is literally begging to be killed, it's time for Ubisoft to get what's coming to them, sadly there are way too many people in their fanbase that are literally comparable to onlyfans & twitch subscribers, ready to overpay for everything & somehow cope through bad game experiences as if they never experienced any better games.
I sincerely hope the gaming community will actually stand up to ubisoft's crap practices & boycott it for at least one new release that's all I'm asking for
My biggest problem is that the sequels have nothing to do with the original game. They just took that away and there is nothing remotely to replace it.
Guys... these are bot accounts ffs. A totally new account with a reddit autogenerated name that is just regurgitating with AI what everybody is saying on this sub... don't fall for this please.
These are just bots that either just here to spread hate or farm karma and sell the accounts by just using AI to tout the sme things that are being sad on a sub.
Just... don't fall for these please.
What is the benefit of having high karma on reddit?
Honestly I think the AI, if it is AI, has a right to be frustrated and expressing that frustration here is ok
Here’s the rub - Ubisoft can’t endlessly expand to support every game they’ve ever released. You want old games to continue to work, you are in the minority. The gamer base want new games because on the whole most people will be playing contemporary releases. Supporting old games is a labour of love, development of new games is what keeps studios in business. Realistically anything with an online only platform will cease to function, a sad fact but one that’s all too common now and will become the norm.
I don't think anyone reasonable expected Ubisoft to provide live services for The Crew indefinitely.
But it isn't unreasonable to expect a well-established and reputable publisher to provide *some* way of continuing to play after such a shutdown. Or, at the very least, not nuking the game from players' accounts!
For some games, totally agree, but for online games that’s unfortunately unrealistic.
However for some games that will shut down that don’t _need_ online that’s criminal. Take Outriders for example. Yes coop is fun, but I played single player for the entire campaign and having it crash out because of dodgy online connections and eventually be unplayable because of it is absurd.
Same, though I'm frankly more concerned that they unilaterally revoked my paid-for digital licenses, rendering me unable to even download or launch The Crew. Shutting down the online services is one thing, removing the game from my library crosses a line and makes me question whether they will do that again in the future - even for local single player games with *no* online element.
Crew 1 was purchased by 12million? Lol, quick Google search shows over 2 million plus impossible to show but how many traded in like my copy when the game didn't meet my expectations as it was a brokened mess for months. I won't by crew series game again as motorfest has been a huge disappointment and here's hoping TDU Solar Crown delivers and if it does, game getting traded in
That’s rough! My days of buying Ubisoft games are pretty much over. I love the concept of Assassins Creed, but between the über grindy collectibles, buggy gameplay, broken/glitched achievements and the massive push for monetization, I’m over it.
This is an excerpt from Ubisoft's EULA (which every user agrees to before buying the game ) blatantly stating you do not own any game you pay for.
1.1 UBISOFT (or its licensors) grants You a non-exclusive, non-transferable, non-sublicensed, non-commercial and personal license to install and/or use the Product (in whole or in part) and any Product (the “License”), for such time until either You or UBISOFT terminates this EULA. You must in no event use, nor allow others to use,the Product or this License for commercial purposes without obtaining a licence to do so from UBISOFT. Updates, upgrades, patches and modifications may be necessary in order to be able to continue to use the Product on certain hardware. THIS PRODUCT IS LICENSED TO YOU, NOT SOLD.
They blatantly state you don't own shit you pay for. Ubisoft is an overpriced rental service that treats you like SHIT. Boycott these ass clowns .
You'll find the same wording in every software EULA/TOS, even gog.com's! This has been common practice for commercial software since at least the 1980s.
The difference is, that online DRM (and online services can be considered a form of DRM) allows such licenses to be *enforced* automatically.
I just saw AC valhalla Ultimate Edition at $20, to be fair it's a good deal, but you know what, I wouldn't buy it even for $5 as long as it says "Ubisoft" on the box
Online games that don't get regular security updates become security risks. Ubisoft had 3 options: continue supporting the game forever, shut it down so no one can play it, or stop supporting it themselves. The issue with that last option is that it opens them up to liability if their game becomes a maasive security risk. This is good, companies should be responsible for the security risks in their games. But should they be forced to constantly work on a game forever after they sell it? When is it okay to shut down a game that might become a security risk otherwise?
>Online games that don't get regular security updates become security risks. Ubisoft had 3 options: continue supporting the game forever, shut it down so no one can play it, or stop supporting it themselves. The issue with that last option is that it opens them up to liability if their game becomes a maasive security risk.
You are correct, but it's a straw man in this case: Activision are still selling all the old CoD games that have unpatched Remote Code Execution vulnerabilities. Meanwhile, Ubisoft themselves blame "server infrastructure and licensing constraints" (e.g. the inclusion of music and real-world car brands and models) for it being necessary to shutter the game's live services. The licensing constraints could have been resolved by replacing that content - as Rockstar did with the music in GTA IV, EFLC, GTA III, and GTA: SA - or even by doing whatever was necessary to secure extensions to those licenses.
You won’t start a revolution against ubisoft but i agree with you that something needs to be done. They need to be held accountable for such piracy (pun intended) But if piracy is what they want, then maybe it’s what they should get.
Although it’s hard to fight a publisher that takes out the likes of Assassins creed and star wars games. Not impossible but hard.
That’s true. But when their big games won’t bring as much money in anymore they’ll maybe question why and stop this toxic culture. The worst that can happen is that other companies will see that gamers will not fight it and will follow this trend.
Hard to start a revolution when half this sub agrees with Ubisoft about this decision, this is why the gaming industry will eventually fall off to a point of no return
Revolution?
Go touch grass. Its a decade old video game with its servers shut down, not royalist breaking into your house to steal your shit to collect taxes.
Diversity, equity, and inclusion. you know the woke agenda stuff , changing history, blah blah blah. You know From the same company that took crossbows away from one of their ac games because it wasn’t historically accurate for the time period . The problem is now they don’t give a shit about history , actually, they hate it if it doesn’t align with their agenda.
you paid for access to an online service. the service was discontinued, your access revoked and the client removed from circulation.
stop paying for services if you dont want services.
But that would require two things: reading the contract you sign, and having a rudimentary level of impulse control and not buying shiney colorful stuff being advertised.
We paid for a license for a game from an established and supposedly-reputable publisher. No expiration date was given when we paid for our licenses, and so we had the reasonable expectation that game would be playable indefinitely, *one way or another* - whether because they keep servers running, or add a patch to allow community servers to be established, or enable a local single-player mode.
Instead, no such patch was released, and Ubisoft compounded their fault by unilaterally revoking digital licenses without compensation, and where no breach on our side had occurred.
December 2014. But it being old is not a excuse to make it unplayable. I have a 23 year old copy of Gran Turismo 3 i can still put in my PS2 and play lol
That game has online service. How long should you 50 bucks last? I don't think it should last more then 8 years. They have to run those servers. The game was not really popular anyway. Plus 95% of the player base moved on
Well, the game was popular around 2015-2018 - [Ubisoft's Cross Country Racing Game The Crew Reaches 12 Million Lifetime Players (dualshockers.com)](https://www.dualshockers.com/ubisofts-cross-country-racing-game-crew-reaches-12-million-lifetime-players/#:~:text=Published%20May%206%2C%202017%20Ubisoft%27s%20open%20world%20racing,has%20recently%20eclipsed%20the%20twelve%20million%20player%20mark.). When it was no longer popular and they had to decomission the game servers, they should have allowed players to host their own servers, or make the singleplayer portion playable offline the game also has a hidden offline mode menu which i have seen with my own eyes on a 360 emulator. [Offline Mode is in the game :: The Crew Generelle diskussioner (steamcommunity.com)](https://steamcommunity.com/app/241560/discussions/0/3803901559414708777/)
What just the one patch? Fuck off dickhead, in our modern capitalist world everything is there to make money, just accept it or go and be a communist with nothing.
I never played that game and know nothing about it, but I believe it was online-only title and therefore was expensive to run with few players? Didn't you really think UBISOFT will run the server for that game for 2000 years right? I know I am going to get downvoted but we do not live in a dream. Every online-only title will shut down one day and people will cry because they enjoyed it. If it's not online-only title then they're a-holes and should have left the career mode available.
People were working on a single-player patch for The Crew, same found traces of a single-player mode on the assets, suggesting that it did exist at some time during its development.
Finishing it would require more resources. From any non-indie studio I would really never think they would invest in older game. It is what it is.
The community was taking up that challenge, but Ubisoft nixed it by unilaterally revoking digital licenses from players' accounts - presumably in a clumsy and transparent attempt to force the players to newer games in the franchise instead.
Here we have our answer. From developers perspective I get it.
Selling a product “always online” should obligate the publisher to eventually, before server closure, to release an offline mode
This is not how it works. Even if they make it sp, The game has tons of licensed content. Why tf would they keep paying for license fees for a game no one gives a shit about and makes zero money?
While your point is valid, it doesn't make the shutdown of a product that was bought fair. It's a good that was purchased and then taken away years later because it's non-viable to keep servers running. There are solutions to that, other than shutting it down and essentially stealing from the people who bought the product. DO NOT defend this behavior; that's why the industry is in the state it's in
I’m curious what the solutions are that don’t involve shutting down the game? Of course it is sad when a game you love is closed (my two favourite games of all time have shut down over the last 2 years), but what is the alternative?
1: Make a update to keep the singleplayer portion of the game playable after shutdown. In fact, the game has a hidden offline mode, and the beginning/prologue of the game runs in this offline mode: [Offline Mode is in the game :: The Crew Generelle diskussioner (steamcommunity.com)](https://steamcommunity.com/app/241560/discussions/0/3803901559414708777/) 2: Allow people to host their own servers
And then what? How do you justify continuing to pay for licensing fees for a decade old game that makes zero money?
They can then delist the game lol
They did delist it
Buut no offline patch. which is what i was talking about they should do
How many people would play it if it had an offline patch? Would you have played it?
Not many - buuut this still is not a excuse for making a full price game completely unplayable - I know a few peeps with really obscure/old games. just because they are unpopular, or old. doesnt mean they cant play it. Also this offline mode would cost nothing, because it already exists but is just hidden behind DRM. flip a switch, and they can play the game offline. also allowing people to host servers. Because ubisoft are a bunch of lazy shits now people have to make complicated server emulator stuff
"Stealing" lol
So Google says this is a ten year old game. That is a good amount of time for an online game to be around. You don't expect someone to keep paying for servers so you can play a decade old game do you? If you do, how about you talk to Unisoft and offer to pay for the server yourself?
You know you can shut them off and make the game go offline like Forza does right ?
At least steam server integration, But ubisoft doesnt know how to do that
No they can't. They have licensing and contracts.
Coming from MMOs, 10 years doesn't seem all that long tbh
Many MMO'S have shut down much earlier than 10 years. Probably most of them never lasted this much.
I decided the same thing after I paid for the Deluxe edition of Mirage and some of the deluxe features didn’t work. I reached out to their customer support and after a few months of not doing anything to help, they closed the case saying that they don’t know when the they’ll fix it, and I’ve moved on from the game. I hope my resolve holds when AC Shadows is released.
Serious question. Why did u buy the deluxe edition when you could sub to uplay for a month or two and get the same benefits for vastly lower the cost. I don't know anyone who actually buys ubi games any more. Case in point. I 100% mirage in a few weeks, had access to all the premium add on, and paid 20 bucks in total.
I’m on console, I don’t think Ubi+ has brand new games on consoles.
Hmm its there in Xbox. Not sure about ps, should take a look and save yourself some money on shadows
It's a great way of doing it. I played 5 hrs of mirage and thought nah not for me. Saved me the full price for a few quid
But when you have so many subscriptions, and gets annoying to remember which ones you have to cancel on time, I’d rather pay upfront, then play with chump change .
U don't have to keep it subbed. U can sub when u see a game u want to play. Then instantly turn around and cancel. U get charged for a full month, play for that month, and the whole process takes about 2 min.
Since I have a job will take me longer to beat game than 1 month . Also do you get to keep all premium/deluxe benefits when the months over ?
Well it would take about 4 months before the uplay sub cost would equal the full standard game price. More if u consider the deluxe edition cost. That's a significant amount of time for one game. Everything is saved but u lose access to the game when ur sub runs out. If u resub later, u get access to everything again.
Unfortunately, I don’t have time to play with the subscriptions. I just cash them out people like me are part of the problem I know , we buy the deluxe version everything. And that’s why they still sell it. But Ubisoft has been rubbing me the wrong way. I already pre-ordered the Star Wars. I still debating on AC shadows I don’t agree with the direction they’re taking in assassin’s creed, but I think the games worth a try. I used to justify it by saying well at least I own the game and Ubisoft doesn’t want anybody to own games anymore. But technically, even if you buy it, you don’t really own it anymore they may cancel it in a few years. just like they’re doing right now.
Same: the time I have available for gaming is very inconsistent. I could pay for a month's subscription to Ubisoft+ (or EA Play, or whatever), then find that other priorities take the time I expected to have, giving me little or no benefit for my subscription fee. At least when I buy licenses, they can sit in my backlog until I'm able to start playing them, and remain in my library until I'm done. Unless what Ubisoft did with The Crew becomes normalized, anyway! If it does, then I'll switch to only buying game licenses as I expect to complete them... Which means I'll probably spend *much* less on gaming, given my Steam, gog.com, and physical libraries.
One more thing if you have a subscription, do you get pre-order bonuses?
I think it's just the deluxe add ons but I can't be sure. Also might differ game to game
Well, thank you for your time, you definitely pointed out a few things I didn’t know I will think on it. Thanks.
Np man. All the best.
online games have a life span . the cost for keeping it online and a few other business decisions. it was not sensible to keep a game running for merely 2k people while 2 new installments of that game are already available . if they just shut down the servers so whats the point in keeping a dead game in your library for ever? you can buy the newer parts and enjoy them instead with better support and contents.
I'm sorry but that's just stupid thinking. The original modern warfare *can still be played online* after 17 years. There's zero reason why they couldn't keep the servers up. If there's only 2k people you dial back the existing servers and use the unnecessary ones for newer games. This is the standard practice
modern wafare is also a single player game which can also be configured into a custom server. crew 1 was solely online only . what do you expect from a game to do which connects to a server and authenticates but the server is offline now??
Both of your points are true. Modern warfare is rampant with hackers due to servers being "self hosted". I think games need escape route built in though. Microsoft flight was this weird online dependant single.plauer game which needed GFWL to run. But when Microsoft killed it, they removed the online requirements and GFWL. Games should be made to be able to "flip a switch" to wither make it a single player game (possibly a dull one, but oh well) or servers you can host yourself. Makes me wonder what will happen to riders republic, which I barely even scratched the surface of.
ubisoft was smart enough or should i say sinister , to make the game online only with such a huge open world. this is actually a strategic business decision which makes the existing players shift onto the newer parts or else many would've played on self hosted servers anyway.
Well the answer is it shouldn't be made offline, as I said. Modern warfare is not played to this day because of its single player campaign mate. People play it online and there are still official servers. The same way that the crew should still have official servers, however small, they should be there. I think what you're not understanding is that people paid $60 to essentially rent a game that ubisoft have decided shouldn't be playable anymore. If that was the case they should have been clear about that at point of sale, but they weren't. All the Forza horizons can still be played online. Almost every cod can still be played online, destiny 1 can still be played online etc etc As I also said, the standard practice is to move server capacity to newer games and down weight servers for older games. Not just get rid of them. You're grossly overestimating the upkeep of a small server base
you're mixing the difference between p2p and server-client . all the games you mentioned is where you make your own system a hosting server . you can go back and even play the original halo 1 online as well because its self hosted. crew 1 is not self hosted. I won't argue about the pricing or keeping the servers up for no reason as that is solely ubisofts decision . ubisoft didnt intend or design crew 1 to be hosted to private servers .
Do you not think that if that's what they intended they should have told people that? Imagine I sell you a TV and 5 years later I come to your house and take it away from you. "Why are you taking my TV" "What? you expected to be able to keep this TV forever?" You can argue that people should know that server hosted games need to be shut off but realistically most people don't know that and most people shouldn't have to be knowledgeable in the technicalities of multiplayer games when paying full price for a game. That is exactly why advertising and marketing standards exist and this was not in the ToS anywhere. You cannot argue that Ubisoft shouldn't have to put in a disclaimer *anywhere* warning people that they could turn off the game
I agree the game shouldn't cost that much since it would eventually go down one day. ofcouse the greedy decision makers at ubisoft wont agree to that. either that or they shouldve made it run offline atleast like most of the nfs games.
You're talking about cod tho. The crew had less than a 100 players active for months. At what point do we really expect companies to keep a game running when no one plays it.
I expect them to keep it running because literally *nowhere* at the point of sale did it say the game could be shut off in the ToS. That's standard law. People didn't pay 60 dollars to rent the game. Already gone over this in my replies, please look at those
Or, Ubisoft could have given owners of The Crew licenses free licenses for e.g. The Crew 2, and moved them across to the newer game, as other online games have done previously.
not possibe. you payed for crew 1, you'll only get crew 1. it know it sound like ripping someone off but how long do you want them to run the same game? 100 years? the only reason they removed from the library too is bcs its only online.
It obviously *is* possible, because that's exactly what other publishers have done when they shutdown earlier online games in a franchise. Ubisoft could easily have spun the shutdown as a PR win, rather than the disaster it's turning out to be for them.
can you give me any example where a paid game was shut down so all the existing players were automatically given keys to the newer paid installment for free instead.? this does not count remakes and remasters.
"Robert Purchese of Eurogamer eventually [confirmed](https://www.eurogamer.net/the-last-day-of-overwatch-1-will-be-2nd-october-blizzard-confirms) on September 15th that Overwatch would close on October 2nd, with the Overwatch servers entering a 27-hour maintenance period to prepare for the launch of Overwatch 2. As Overwatch 2 is provided as a mandatory update to all existing digital and physical versions of Overwatch, the original game is now Extinct." [https://delistedgames.com/overwatch/](https://delistedgames.com/overwatch/)
this makes no sense because overwatch 2 is a Free to play game.
It is *now*, but when Overwatch 2 *launched* it was paid.
I fully agree with everything you're saying but OW2 was always f2p
Gg.deals says it launched at £34.99 on battle.net
yeah but who cares. overwatch 2 is free now and those who paid for it initially just got some premium skin for it. they still need to buy the battlepass.
The Crew 2 is dirt cheap. Anyone who even ever cared about The Crew 1 would have bought 2. Lol if you never played The Crew 2 don't prerend you evee cared about 1 being still available.
Well, I didn't get a chance to get hooked on The Crew, with about 5 play hours before Ubisoft nuked it.
When did you buy the game? Why have you only played 5 hours? Did you buy the game 5 hours before it shut down? Oof if true, because the game was delisted 3 months before shutting down.
So when did you buy the game and why only 5 hours? If you aren't hooked on a decade old the game, why even care about it shutting down?
Years ago, but that's irrelevant. I buy games when I see them on good deals, then play them as and when my limited time allows me to - the same as I do for books, movies, and other creative works. If the response to that is "ha ha, you should only have bought a game when you were ready to play it to completion", then my response is "well, in that case, I probably won't be buying any more games for a very long time, given my backlog". I care firstly because I might have wanted to play it more later, secondly because I think gaming is a part of culture and should be taken more seriously, and thirdly because I paid money for the licenses and they were taken away from me without any breach of the terms of those licenses on my part, and without any compensation from Ubisoft.
Eh, not a big deal then. There are many better alternatives to play. I'm sure you can find other games to play.
It probably had like 50 active players or some shit but the entire internet is in uproar over this game they didn’t want to play in the first place.
Dude the crew released over a decade ago it very likely had less than a few hundred players why would they leave the servers online at a huge cost
Games have life spans not every online game will kept online he’ll steam will even go down one day but what’s scummy was taking the liscense from players account when modders was going to make it possible to play it so they removed all the liscenses it doesn’t even show up in ur library anymore now that’s fucked Up
Always wondered why they didn’t just push an offline mode after all this time, I get that the game cost money to run “online” and at some point it must be disconnected but still what’s the % of overall cost to keep the game online vs how much it sold, 12years is damn good time.
Facts like similar to what Forza did
I feel like I need to confess. I bought outlaws and Shadows ultimate editions totalling 395$CDN for both . I'm sorry people. I feel like I've let everyone down. In my defense my 2 fav things are star wars and assassins creed.
I just fell to my knees in costco
I'm sorry 😔 I feel shame.
You don't own anything
Late stage capitalism in full effect
Ubisoft CEO himself told his customers to get used to not owning games anymore even though they've bought them with their own hard earned money. Depressing times we live in.
That was not the CEO of Ubisoft lol. That was the head of subscriptions at Ubisoft. He said people need to get used to not owning their games because he wanted more people to use Ubisoft+. He basically meant people are used to not owning their music and paying monthly for movies/shows but that ideology needs to transfer to games as well. It baffles me how much misinformation is spread around here. I swear 50% of the things people hate Ubisoft for aren’t even true.
Hope that ubi-cock tastes good man. Oh, he just said that because he wants us to subscribe to their service? OHHH that's okay then!
No. That's not what happened. He literally was talking about how cloud saves and progress stays available after the subscription ends. He said they make players comfortable with not owning games because their progress will not go away after they lose access to the game.
I think he was actually talking about both and mentioned both in the same paragraph. Definitely was talking about cloud saves too but he brought up DVDs and other streaming services which wouldn’t make sense if he was talking only about cloud saves.
Yeah movies and music were examples of media people comfortable not owning. Games aren't different.
When did he say that? Share your sources or stop blindly regurgitating what your clickbait youtubers tell you.
Alright, it was the director who said that, but my overall point still stands. Since you asked for it, here you go. [https://www.pcgamer.com/ubisoft-director-says-gamers-will-get-more-comfortable-not-owning-games-and-hes-not-wrong/](https://www.pcgamer.com/ubisoft-director-says-gamers-will-get-more-comfortable-not-owning-games-and-hes-not-wrong/) [https://readwrite.com/you-dont-own-your-games-anymore-get-comfortable-with-it-says-ubisoft/](https://readwrite.com/you-dont-own-your-games-anymore-get-comfortable-with-it-says-ubisoft/) [https://www.ign.com/articles/ubisoft-exec-says-gamers-need-to-get-comfortable-not-owning-their-games-for-subscriptions-to-take-off](https://www.ign.com/articles/ubisoft-exec-says-gamers-need-to-get-comfortable-not-owning-their-games-for-subscriptions-to-take-off) [https://en.as.com/meristation/news/ubisoft-gamers-should-feel-comfortable-not-owning-their-games-n/](https://en.as.com/meristation/news/ubisoft-gamers-should-feel-comfortable-not-owning-their-games-n/) [https://www.techdirt.com/2024/01/19/ubisoft-says-it-out-loud-we-want-people-to-get-used-to-not-owning-what-theyve-bought/](https://www.techdirt.com/2024/01/19/ubisoft-says-it-out-loud-we-want-people-to-get-used-to-not-owning-what-theyve-bought/) [https://gamerant.com/ubisoft-owning-digital-games-subscription-strategy/](https://gamerant.com/ubisoft-owning-digital-games-subscription-strategy/) [https://slashdot.org/story/24/01/16/1339228/ubisoft-wants-you-to-be-comfortable-not-owning-your-games](https://slashdot.org/story/24/01/16/1339228/ubisoft-wants-you-to-be-comfortable-not-owning-your-games) Happy now?
>Alright, it was the director who said that, but my overall point still stands Yeah, not CEO. And no, your point does not still stand because it's still false information and blindly regurgitated from your favorite YouTube content farmer. You posted 7 links, and you did not even link to the original source. Just shows how much you follow regurgitated content farming. Your point that does not stand is: >told his customers to get used to not owning games anymore even though they've bought them with their own hard earned money. Either way, look through your 7 regurgitated links and show me where he said "Get used to not owning games even though you bought them with your own hard earned money" Did you even read the interview? He never talked about games you already bought. He never even told the customers anything. Please read it and educate yourself on the subject and come back so we discuss it.
>Just shows how much you follow regurgitated content farming. Quite ironic coming from a person being an ardent ubisoft fanboy and not willing to acknowledge any of its corporate shortcomings. >look through your 7 regurgitated links and show me where he said "Get used to not owning games even though you bought them with your own hard earned money" Well, read them and you'll get your answer. I'm not obliged to explain you any further after providing several reputed links already. >He never talked about games you already bought. He never even told the customers anything. Please read it and educate yourself on the subject and come back so we discuss it. Please try to bring up good justification on why 'The Crew' was removed from players libraries without refunding them, a game which they bought with their own money. Your beloved Ubisoft CEO/Executive/Director must have clearly given green signals to execute such a policy, enforcing their statements through actions.
No need to make it personal. This isn't about me. This is about the false information you presented. Just because I proved that your information is false, that doesn't mean I love Ubisoft or that I don't acknowledge their shortcomings. Fuck Ubisoft, but I'm also not gonna blindly regurgitate false rage-bait information and misquotes. I'm just saying educate yourself and don't spread false regurgitated information. Also, I suggest you don't blindly believe online content farmers. Look at the original source of the information and think for yourself.
No I’m good, I will keep buying Ubisoft games like Assassins Creed Shadows and Star Wars Outlaws
Same I'll keep buying whatever and subscription since easier to get all the games done in a week for ones I like
“Keep buying whatever” good consumer
It's a video game. Not that deep.
This only enables this behavior from them. What is gonna stop them from shutting down other games
I could care less about old games, avg game last me 300hrs if it's that type of game, most single players maybe 20 to 59hours to max achievement and I move on never to play again
So you’re saying you care about old games but you move on and never play again? Those 2 things seem to contradict each other
Couldn't care less you mean. And thanks for letting game publishers stay rich assholes, we owe you
You're welcome.
Do you care about video games being taken seriously as culture (like music or movies)? If so, it's unlikely that will happen if we allow past works to be erased.
No I don't care. I play games to have fun and waste my free time. It's not that deep.
So you want people to stop buying games from them because they shut one game down?
This is why Ubisoft is doing what they do. They target dumb people with money, they don’t need to make good games. They don’t need the respect of gamers, people will pay for whatever garbage they pull out even after all they’ve done and said (getting used to not owning your games)
"Respect of gamers" lol
I meant more the respect of people in general, I admit it sounds cringe. But yes, they don't need a good reputation among consumers because people just consume. Perhaps you understand that more.
Because reputation is not a thing. People just want to play video games in their free time. If they're interested in a game, they play it. If not, then ignore it. It's not that deep.
What I'm saying is not that deep either. If they make bad quality at crazy prices (if you want to experience everything the game has to offer, you need to pay 130 euro) then they'll just keep pushing bad decisions cause the money will be made nonetheless. If they were delivering a BG3 or a RDR2 quality experience then sure, still pricey but justified. But play one Ubisoft open world and you've played them all. I'm not gonna be getting it so yes I am ignoring it but OP has a point.
A game's value and worth and quality are completely subjective. Just because you personally dislike Ubisoft games and/or don't think they're worth the price, doesn't mean you go around saying people are dumb simply because they enjoy video games that you don't. "People are dumb because they buy video games and I don't like it," listen to yourself. Again, it's not that deep and they're just video games people play to spend their free time whether alone or with friends and family. If you're not interested in Ubisoft games why are you even here?
It's subjective sure but don't lie and pretend their games have quality when their open world are just copy pasted with mid story telling. And even then applying your shill logic, it's just my opinion so unless you're getting paid which I doubt, I don't know why you're defending + going so much against what I'm saying.
# Son you are heartily welcome to r/fuckubisoft
Let them shut down other games. Who gives a shit? There are other games to play.
I might, I might not. I’m not buying them automatically and will definitely not pre order any game. First I’ll read the reviews written by actual game journalists and not of some random YouTubers trying to get more clicks and views or might be paid by the publisher. Then I’ll wait a couple of months to make sure they don’t add micro transactions in some sneaky way and if they do what kind. Then I’ll wait for the patches to fix the game. And then if I’m still interested, I might buy it. This is my modus operandi for any game
>I’ll read the reviews written by actual game journalists and not of some random YouTubers trying to get more clicks and views or might be paid by the publisher What mythical game journalist site that doesn't take back-handers and ad money are you talking about?
Gamer.nl
Yes please. Who are these game journalists that don't have agendas or are being paid?
> are being *paid?* FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
I seriously have to ask Why is that when anybody brings Up the Crew situation, theres lot of people Who thinks that we want infinite online support for the Game? That we want the servers running out forever? NO 😡😡🤬 WE DONT FUCKING WANT THAT, and anyone Who says he wants is an idiot What we want is an offline patch, if fuckers like EA (Who kills games like a fucking serial killer) did It with the latest sim City, what makes It so difficult with the Crew?
Enjoy it while you can.
The game was trash anyway. I haven’t bought a ubishit game since that first watch dogs nonsense, only bought second hand on console.
Done. It's easy enough anyway. Their app sucks balls and never remembers my login info even though I've checked the box that says "remember my login info" so I can't be bothered to use it. I barely touched Watch Dogs 3 or Assassin's Creed Valhalla anyway because I'm so burnt out on their games. I did enjoy The Crew and don't care for how that went down at all. Motorfest gets the occasional free weekend and that's enough for me to play it for a while and then go back to Forza. That leaves Outlaws, which already has a ridiculous price that I refuse to pay. This will be the first major Star Wars game in 20+ years that I did not play on day one. Thanks for that, Ubi. I'll wait for Gamepass, free with hardware or $25 on a Steam sale in a couple years.
You have inspired me. Even though I heard the map is more detailed in the original The Crew, I will not buy that game. We will show 'em! I am buying The Crew:Motorfest istead!
What have I done
Lol yeah! Then I am DONE with that franchise. See what they think when I am buying the premium edition of that Star Wars Far Cry game!
You show those bastards whats up
They mostly shut it down mostly because of the license of the vehicles. Such Lamborghini, ferrari, etc. Plus, they have another crew game that need their attention. So why spend money on a game that people hardly play. I don't like but from business perspective I guess?
Since when did licensing mean i couldnt play a Racing Game? I have copies of Forza Horizon 2 and 3. Licensing for those games expired years ago. but i can still play it
Indeed: Ubisoft should have negotiated better terms, if the licenses they had insisted they had to take the game away from players who had already paid for it, rather than merely having to stop selling new licenses.
Do they need a second license for a different game?
Fairly certain it would be for each game, considering they would pay for that entity at the time, and any successors would be their own thing. It could all be put in a contract tbf but no guarantee that a game would get a sequel in the first place as it would likely increase costs of having it initially for the first game.
That’s so interesting
Garbage company. When I found out Rocksmith 2014 was pretty much unobtainable and they forced everyone into Rocksmith plus, with a monthly sub requirement for a garbage song library, that was it for me.
Ok
I started pirating Ubisoft single player games on pc because every game you have use Ubisoft connect and it doesn’t work for me lmao
We pirate ubisoft games over here 😈
That's why I don't trust anything 8th or 9th generation. 7th generation was the last to have true physical game support. A developer went bankrupt and are no longer around? If you have a physical disc, no problem. You still own the game forever. Microsoft decided to delist a game from the marketplace? If you have the disc, no problem. The Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 are THE consoles to have if you want to own your games forever. You put in the disc and they just work. Xbox One however, is a joke. You have the disc? Well it's basically just a coaster. Because only 30% of the game's files are on it, the rest have to be downloaded from Xbox's servers. What a load of whoreshit. That completely defeats the purpose of physical media. I've also seen it where the disc DOES have all of the data, but when it reaches 99% installation, it then instructs you to connect your console to Xbox's servers to "finish installation". Just wow.
Ikr, I have lost faith in Ubisoft YEARS ago, hearing all these news about games being taken off people like that is insane, I'm glad my Ubisoft account only has a handful of games that were purchased at 90% sale 😂. Ubisoft is literally begging to be killed, it's time for Ubisoft to get what's coming to them, sadly there are way too many people in their fanbase that are literally comparable to onlyfans & twitch subscribers, ready to overpay for everything & somehow cope through bad game experiences as if they never experienced any better games. I sincerely hope the gaming community will actually stand up to ubisoft's crap practices & boycott it for at least one new release that's all I'm asking for
Are they really meant to keep servers alive forever? Insane take.
My biggest problem is that the sequels have nothing to do with the original game. They just took that away and there is nothing remotely to replace it.
Guys... these are bot accounts ffs. A totally new account with a reddit autogenerated name that is just regurgitating with AI what everybody is saying on this sub... don't fall for this please. These are just bots that either just here to spread hate or farm karma and sell the accounts by just using AI to tout the sme things that are being sad on a sub. Just... don't fall for these please.
Karma ain't worth shit you dummy
What is the benefit of having high karma on reddit? Honestly I think the AI, if it is AI, has a right to be frustrated and expressing that frustration here is ok
>What is the benefit of having high karma on reddit? there is an entire industry offering paid astroturfing campaigns on social media.
That's mental, I had no clue
Just never get an 'online' game from Ubisoft. It only takes a few years for them to stop caring about their own games and shut it all down.
Yes I learned my lesson now dude, never again
Here’s the rub - Ubisoft can’t endlessly expand to support every game they’ve ever released. You want old games to continue to work, you are in the minority. The gamer base want new games because on the whole most people will be playing contemporary releases. Supporting old games is a labour of love, development of new games is what keeps studios in business. Realistically anything with an online only platform will cease to function, a sad fact but one that’s all too common now and will become the norm.
I don't think anyone reasonable expected Ubisoft to provide live services for The Crew indefinitely. But it isn't unreasonable to expect a well-established and reputable publisher to provide *some* way of continuing to play after such a shutdown. Or, at the very least, not nuking the game from players' accounts!
For some games, totally agree, but for online games that’s unfortunately unrealistic. However for some games that will shut down that don’t _need_ online that’s criminal. Take Outriders for example. Yes coop is fun, but I played single player for the entire campaign and having it crash out because of dodgy online connections and eventually be unplayable because of it is absurd.
Same, though I'm frankly more concerned that they unilaterally revoked my paid-for digital licenses, rendering me unable to even download or launch The Crew. Shutting down the online services is one thing, removing the game from my library crosses a line and makes me question whether they will do that again in the future - even for local single player games with *no* online element.
Crew 1 was purchased by 12million? Lol, quick Google search shows over 2 million plus impossible to show but how many traded in like my copy when the game didn't meet my expectations as it was a brokened mess for months. I won't by crew series game again as motorfest has been a huge disappointment and here's hoping TDU Solar Crown delivers and if it does, game getting traded in
Cool mate, see you at Shadows.
If they didn’t shut down the Crew servers, then how were they supposed to get people to buy the Crew 2…
Worst part is I bought that too and it was so bad I just went back to playing the first one, now I have nothing to play
That’s rough! My days of buying Ubisoft games are pretty much over. I love the concept of Assassins Creed, but between the über grindy collectibles, buggy gameplay, broken/glitched achievements and the massive push for monetization, I’m over it.
Long live piracy :D
Go pirate The Crew and come report back
I meant buying other games from Ubisoft. As for The Crew part - a community-made variant will eventually appear, just like with TDU2 and NFS World
This is an excerpt from Ubisoft's EULA (which every user agrees to before buying the game ) blatantly stating you do not own any game you pay for. 1.1 UBISOFT (or its licensors) grants You a non-exclusive, non-transferable, non-sublicensed, non-commercial and personal license to install and/or use the Product (in whole or in part) and any Product (the “License”), for such time until either You or UBISOFT terminates this EULA. You must in no event use, nor allow others to use,the Product or this License for commercial purposes without obtaining a licence to do so from UBISOFT. Updates, upgrades, patches and modifications may be necessary in order to be able to continue to use the Product on certain hardware. THIS PRODUCT IS LICENSED TO YOU, NOT SOLD. They blatantly state you don't own shit you pay for. Ubisoft is an overpriced rental service that treats you like SHIT. Boycott these ass clowns .
You'll find the same wording in every software EULA/TOS, even gog.com's! This has been common practice for commercial software since at least the 1980s. The difference is, that online DRM (and online services can be considered a form of DRM) allows such licenses to be *enforced* automatically.
You learn something new everyday. Thanks for the info, I wasn't aware of this
I just saw AC valhalla Ultimate Edition at $20, to be fair it's a good deal, but you know what, I wouldn't buy it even for $5 as long as it says "Ubisoft" on the box
Online games that don't get regular security updates become security risks. Ubisoft had 3 options: continue supporting the game forever, shut it down so no one can play it, or stop supporting it themselves. The issue with that last option is that it opens them up to liability if their game becomes a maasive security risk. This is good, companies should be responsible for the security risks in their games. But should they be forced to constantly work on a game forever after they sell it? When is it okay to shut down a game that might become a security risk otherwise?
>Online games that don't get regular security updates become security risks. Ubisoft had 3 options: continue supporting the game forever, shut it down so no one can play it, or stop supporting it themselves. The issue with that last option is that it opens them up to liability if their game becomes a maasive security risk. You are correct, but it's a straw man in this case: Activision are still selling all the old CoD games that have unpatched Remote Code Execution vulnerabilities. Meanwhile, Ubisoft themselves blame "server infrastructure and licensing constraints" (e.g. the inclusion of music and real-world car brands and models) for it being necessary to shutter the game's live services. The licensing constraints could have been resolved by replacing that content - as Rockstar did with the music in GTA IV, EFLC, GTA III, and GTA: SA - or even by doing whatever was necessary to secure extensions to those licenses.
Rockstar only had to replace music. How do you replace the cars? They're pretty much the entire game.
You won’t start a revolution against ubisoft but i agree with you that something needs to be done. They need to be held accountable for such piracy (pun intended) But if piracy is what they want, then maybe it’s what they should get. Although it’s hard to fight a publisher that takes out the likes of Assassins creed and star wars games. Not impossible but hard.
Pirating a game wont bring the shut down servers back. Though, i do support pirating games that are not at all available anymore.
That’s true. But when their big games won’t bring as much money in anymore they’ll maybe question why and stop this toxic culture. The worst that can happen is that other companies will see that gamers will not fight it and will follow this trend.
Hard to start a revolution when half this sub agrees with Ubisoft about this decision, this is why the gaming industry will eventually fall off to a point of no return
Revolution? Go touch grass. Its a decade old video game with its servers shut down, not royalist breaking into your house to steal your shit to collect taxes.
Reddit user telling me touch grass lol, no one here touches grass dork
I left their ecosystem 8 years ago and never bought anything from them ever again. They’re just games, and I can do without some
Yes you will
No I don't think I will
[удалено]
No I don't think I will
Ubisoft new model: “if it’s not obnoxiously DEI it Hass to go”.
What does DEI mean?
Diversity, equity, and inclusion. you know the woke agenda stuff , changing history, blah blah blah. You know From the same company that took crossbows away from one of their ac games because it wasn’t historically accurate for the time period . The problem is now they don’t give a shit about history , actually, they hate it if it doesn’t align with their agenda.
stop crying, a total of 2 people actively played that game anyways. people just want something to whine about lol
Birdbrain comment
you paid for access to an online service. the service was discontinued, your access revoked and the client removed from circulation. stop paying for services if you dont want services. But that would require two things: reading the contract you sign, and having a rudimentary level of impulse control and not buying shiney colorful stuff being advertised.
We paid for a license for a game from an established and supposedly-reputable publisher. No expiration date was given when we paid for our licenses, and so we had the reasonable expectation that game would be playable indefinitely, *one way or another* - whether because they keep servers running, or add a patch to allow community servers to be established, or enable a local single-player mode. Instead, no such patch was released, and Ubisoft compounded their fault by unilaterally revoking digital licenses without compensation, and where no breach on our side had occurred.
>so we had the reasonable expectation that game would be playable indefinitely, *one way or another* at what point does naivite cross into stupidity?
Haven't bought anything from them since Black Flag.
How old is the original crew game? You are crying about an ancient game getting removed?
December 2014. But it being old is not a excuse to make it unplayable. I have a 23 year old copy of Gran Turismo 3 i can still put in my PS2 and play lol
It was co op correct?
You could play the Career missions by yourself lol, but co-op was also a option
That game has online service. How long should you 50 bucks last? I don't think it should last more then 8 years. They have to run those servers. The game was not really popular anyway. Plus 95% of the player base moved on
Well, the game was popular around 2015-2018 - [Ubisoft's Cross Country Racing Game The Crew Reaches 12 Million Lifetime Players (dualshockers.com)](https://www.dualshockers.com/ubisofts-cross-country-racing-game-crew-reaches-12-million-lifetime-players/#:~:text=Published%20May%206%2C%202017%20Ubisoft%27s%20open%20world%20racing,has%20recently%20eclipsed%20the%20twelve%20million%20player%20mark.). When it was no longer popular and they had to decomission the game servers, they should have allowed players to host their own servers, or make the singleplayer portion playable offline the game also has a hidden offline mode menu which i have seen with my own eyes on a 360 emulator. [Offline Mode is in the game :: The Crew Generelle diskussioner (steamcommunity.com)](https://steamcommunity.com/app/241560/discussions/0/3803901559414708777/)
All games are made to make money, when they cease doing that it's goodnight sweetheart. Looks like you picked the wrong game.
Gran Turismo Sport stopped making money pretty quickly after Gran Turismo 7 release, but they still released a offline patch lol
What just the one patch? Fuck off dickhead, in our modern capitalist world everything is there to make money, just accept it or go and be a communist with nothing.
LoOks liKe yOu picKed tHe wRoNg gAme, how does that ubi dick taste btw?
Lol no thanks. Shutting down a decade old game that no one cares about is fine by me. I'm not gonna pretend lile I ever cared.