• @Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      121 year ago

      Maybe raise a stink with your attorney general and/or representative, too. The whole idea that a company can sell licenses for something and then arbitrarily decide they don’t want to do it anymore and revoke all the licenses doesn’t sound legal. And if it is, it doesn’t sound like it should be.

      • Einar
        link
        fedilink
        171 year ago

        It’s not about this particular game.

        It’s about setting a precedent for games you do care about.

          • Einar
            link
            fedilink
            9
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Not in this case, seeing that progress is stored online.

            Who says that the game you care about tomorrow won’t do this next? Why be against an action/not care about something that can only benefit players now and in the long term?

            • @Mango@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              -51 year ago

              The games I care about all already have backup options. They’re all the kinds of games that attract people like me who will just fix them right away.

      • @Gunrigger@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        The Crew was great in its time. It was basically the bridge between Test Drive Unlimited (superior open world gameplay) and early Forza Horizon (superior driving physics). Later Forza Horizon games simply took all the good gameplay features from both TLU and The Crew and is unmatched in quality now.

        The Crew 2 was worse than both its predecessor and the competing Forza Horizon at that time, so if you were talking about that I’d half agree. But it’s still a problematic industry trend worth stopping.

  • Einar
    link
    fedilink
    491 year ago

    Digital “ownership”.

    Ubisoft is determined to take things one step further to stamp out any attempts to continue playing it past its expiry date.

    • Midnight Wolf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      14
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Afaik nobody has cracked it as it’s always-online, though I’d be happily incorrect about this if one can slide me some sauce. I’m one of the affected players in the shutdown (still play occasionally) so the ability to continue playing this game would be very nice.

    • ඞmir
      link
      fedilink
      71 year ago

      That eats into their profits for their other/new games

  • @Son_of_dad@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    161 year ago

    When Nintendo eshop closed, I lost all my purchases. I tried contacting Nintendo to see if they could transfer my purchases to my switch account, but contacting Nintendo is like trying to contact god, you’re gonna get nowhere

  • @Mango@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    121 year ago

    As if copies of a game on your computer is somehow more digital than the copy being on a disk or a chip that’s ROM.

    • @evranch@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      131 year ago

      Digital ownership, not storage. As in DRM, GaaS licensing and always-online launchers.

      A ROM cartridge was physical ownership, if you had the cartridge, you could play.

      A CD-key was also a form of physical ownership, install the game and type in the key from the case, you could play.

      • @richmondez@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        -2
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        That should be “ownership” as actual ownership implies having control over a thing and no one who “purchased” this seems to have much control. Breaking the DRM and creating a self hosted sever is taking ownership of it. Don’t pretend CD keys were physical ownership either unless the key was entirely validated offline which admittedly older key schemes were.

  • UndeadFoodSnob
    link
    fedilink
    English
    101 year ago

    Thanks UbiSoft for rubbing it in my face with this message, “You no longer have access to this game. Why not check the Store to pursue your adventures?”