MWEB GameZone writes: "The only reason Ubisoft is willing to pull these game's from Steam is because they are convinced that doing so will make them more money."
I honestly don't blame them, they're probably fed up with all the "screw you Ubisoft, I'm just gonna pirate it, you ain't getting my money" people. @Sillicur Oh, I read the title wrong... for some reason I though it said PC instead of steam.
How would taking it off steam help stop pirating?
exactly. steam keeps the prices down and makes the games affordable for most people. now ubisoft's games will sell less. annefrankly i think theyre going to regret their decision
Misunderstanding the title does little to rectify your comment's backwards notions; your position and understanding of the situation are abundantly clear. Ubisoft themselves have admitted that the piracy problem was 1) grossly exaggerated and 2) a direct result of their draconian DRM solution in Uplay. While promising PC players 2 years ago that they would renew their faith and investment in PC gaming by reviewing these practices, they have done no such thing and today have affirmed that they will only worsen their hostile attitude towards their PC customers. I will not buy a PC game from Uplay, after all the hassle and ill will it has garnered over the years. They are showing their teeth now as just another money-grubbing EA wannabe. Crappy DRM and online practices? Check. Hostile attitude towards PC players? Check. Undeserved sense of exceptionalism to the point of separatism? Check. Boy, you guys sure are big dawgs now, huh? Just as cool as EA! Let's see how long you can keep it up once everyone realises you keep making the same basic open-world game over and over and over again.
It doesen't matter which DRM they use for protection. There will Always be someone who can crack the game sooner or later. Just look at splinter cell Chaos. It took 1 y 2 month too download and crack
Your position is fine, but I hope you don't use it to justify pirating their games?
I don't pirate games.
steam gets 30% which is quite a large cut, same with anything on apple store. not sure how much sony, microsoft and nintendo get. as far as protecting from pirates lords of the fallen and the upcoming gta v will have some new drm that hasn't been cracked on fifa 15 or lords of the fallen.
3 disagrees so i am wrong? can someone correct me thanks
I will admit it now i pirate games that i can not literally buy, through emulation due to none localisation and region locked to stupid moronic idiots getting games banned. But if it comes down to it i'd buy it if i got the chance, got to make the collection grow somehow and with over 300 steam games, my wallet makes a difference in £.
its like '' Hey download our game for free, no steam DRM Protection needed'' Stupid ubisoft....
Steam wasn't required in the first place, unless you bought it on Steam. U-Play was and still is required, regardless of where you buy it from.
It's all about removing the retailer/etailer from the equation. Unfortunately though what the PC doesn't need is lots of game frontends and stores and we do need competition to keep prices reasonable. I find EA's Origin solution a total mess having to user a web browser. It also won't help promote Steam games machines if the major publishers go out of their way not to support it.
No steam no buy for me. Uplay is horrible
You still have to use Uplay even if it was on Steam so not really a justification is it.
I'm surprised the games were on Steam in the first place considering uPlay has been around for awhile and all Ubisoft games have been linked to it. In the end its their games and they can do with it what they want, they could even distribute them on Floppy disks if they wanted too (not endorsing this).
I don't understand the line of thinking that a company is greedy for wanting to distribute a game on their own instead of giving a portion of their profit to valve... I get that people like steam, and WISH all pc titles would be sold through it, but it's extremely unreasonable to EXPECT it. Isn't Valve also greedy in all of this? There whole during strong armed "volume sales" model is exactly how Wal-Mart operates. They don't win many company of the year awards, despite the low prices.
Don't bother explaining logic, if it comes any hint of criticism on Steam, don't expect reasonableness.
Ubisoft and EA are both as greedy as each other. You realise that they are charging £50/$85 for all their new games now right? That's just for the standard edition for PC digital download. I think it's even worse in Europe and Australia. The Ubisoft games were first removed from Steam UK as the steam forums exploded due to the ridiculous pricing in UK/EU. Now it seems all steam stores have had them removed. This is just publishers getting too big for their boots and thinking they can charge any price and we'll pay for it. It might work in the console world but it'll never work with PC gamers. We have more options and stores to buy our games much cheaper from and it doesn't involve piracy like most of the console fanboys think.
I'm talking about Valve's greed. You act as if UPlay and Steam are the only places to get Ubisoft games. But answer this question. Why should Valve have more control over the price of a game than the people who actually created the game? I'm not here to say that Ubisoft isn't greedy, of course they are. Any company wants to maximize the returns on their investment. What I'm saying is that Value is just as greedy, price fixing their way into a consumer sanctioned pseudo-monopoly, to the point where gamers EXPECT, publishers to slash their margins while Valve takes recieved a large portion of the revenues. Meanwhile, the entire process costs Valve nearly nothing. If I don't want to sell my product in Walmart, because I don't like the way wal-Mart devalues my product, I have every right to choose to sell it directly or through target instead. Sure my volume of sales may decrease, but that's my perogative .
@mhunterjr I really don't give a shit what price Ubisoft set their games at. I never buy their games at their recommended price. Why is Valve greedy? It's Ubisoft that set the ridiculous prices on steam not Valve. Not sure why you are blaming Valve when you should be blaming the publishers setting the ludicrous prices. I'm willing to bet that Ubisoft removed the games themselves to get a bigger piece of the pie on their own store. If Valve did put their foot down on the price hikes from these publishers then I congratulate them for standing up for the customer. I buy all my games for half the price the publishers set so I know with experience that there are many places to shop other than steam, uplay or origin. You just seem to have a grudge with Steam and Valve when in fact the publishers are the ones taking the piss out of the consumers and not Valve.
@mhunterjr Your Walmart analogy is pretty spot on and you answered you question yourself...Steam is like Walmart, prices are a bit lower and there are tons more people that shop there than anywhere else. If a vendor chooses to not sell their product at Walmart they are essentially not exposing their product to a lot of consumers, lowering their visibility and potential sales. Case in point, I go on the Steam store almost everyday, just to see what's on sale and such...and everyday I would see ACU or FC4 on the front page, I likely will buy it at some point even if I'm not super interested right now...I never ever go on origin or uplay...never...so I have to go out of my way to buy them, on a platform I don't like...odds are I won't play them until they get to steam and by the time they do, I'll have moved on...
You've got me all wrong. I have no grudge against valve or steam or anyone. Business is business. I see things for how they are. 'Greed' is a word you used to describe ubisoft and their quest to make more money from their games. I'm just showing you how valve has the exact same motives. Valve's model is exactly like walmart's. Their low prices attract a large number of customers. In exchange for access to these customers those who want to sell items in steam/Wal-Mart have to agree to do so with rather low profit margins... for many smaller companies this is a dream come true, because it means access to massive distribution. Especially when you don't have a large marketing budget. But for a larger company, fully capable of distributing your own product, and investing millions into marketing of your product, the idea of paying for distribution becomes less appealing. You may not realize it, but Valve, like wal-mart, pressures publishers to sell their products at below what would be considered market value. And valve does this, not because they are consumer advocates, but because they love money, and their wide network of suppliers gives them the leverage to forge this competitive advantage... And the profit they make is 100% at the expense of those who make the games. As Valve grows more powerful in this space, they'll undoubtedly begin to demand a larger percentage of revenues. If you are EA or Ubisoft, why would you want a 3rd party having so much control of your product? @bednet Lowering exposure and total sales is not all bad, especially if you are getting more money per sale, and getting more "quality customers". What I mean by that is: a customer who is generally interested in your product, knows how to get it because of you're marketing and outreach, and choose to come you YOUR STORE, is probably more likely to be willing to pay full price, return on the future. The guy who only got it because it's on sale may not ever even touch it. To be frank, those types of customers are considered by businesses to be more valuable.
Another thing it does is remove the player feedback that each game has in Steam. No forums, no game ratings, no way to know if people are having problems or another words no bad publicity..
This is the only real impact of the removal. Prior to this, even if you bought the game from Steam you still need to sign into Uplay to play the game.
Steam allows you to do other things as well. Like In-Home Streaming which I had planned on using to stream the game from my main PC to my less capable laptop on the opposite side of my home.
Never realized that cutting out the middleman was a sign of greed. Always believed it was about increased profit margins. Personally its their games could careless where they sale them just as long they keep making them not bothered.
"Always believed it was about increased profit margins." You have essentially defined it in your own statement, yet lack the critical thinking and reasoning to see it. Blinded by capitalistic idealism. Inconveniencing your customers and forcing them to use your products or get nothing at all for a tiny profit increase is what I consider greed.
Forgive me if I don't understand, but how exactly is Ubisoft suddenly inconveniencing the consumers? To my understanding they already required the use of Uplay, so it's not as if they weren't already enforcing its use. Pulling the games from Steam really only requires the consumers to transfer over to something that they were already using, and would have continued to use, in the first place. All they're doing by pulling games from Steam is, as castillo put it, "cutting out the middleman," and in no way inconveniencing others anymore than they were already doing before they pulled the games from Steam.
There are pro's and con's of both models... You fall to realize how controlling valve is during these negotiations. "Sell your product at the price I demand and give us a large chunk of the money you earn...I don't care how much it cost you to develop and market this title"
But cutting the middleman out usually means the customer gets it cheaper. In this case we are paying more. How does that work?.
Not keen on how they are going to price items or if they will offer deals, but seeing as how the profit increase and they see more they May eventually do sales or offer discounts. Till then getting rid of the middle man is priority.
Not greedy, just stupid. All that means is that I'm less likely to buy their titles. I'm always keeping an eye out for steam sales and have picked up a fair few Ubi games over the last few years thanks to the major steam sales. By removing their catalogue from steam, they've just basically gone off my radar as I couldn't care less for Uplay let alone bother to check their store. On the plus side though, Ubi probably realize this and might do a huge sale or something to try and promote Uplay and get people to show an interest in it. A few unmissable deals and I'll certainly be interested.
Wait... What! Really? Well... I guess it's their prerogative. This will harm the Steam-machines if others follow suit. All the more reason to have a PS4 or X1.
It won't really harm Steam machines, because these games were not playable on SteamOS anyway.
I did not know that. I stopped hardcore PC gaming when all these publishers started pushing their own services that just wanted to infect my computer. Too many hoops to jump through just to play a game. These publishers are really flexing their muscles this gen. So many obstacles put in the way of 'press start'.
2cents....You're embarrassing your self. Please leave planet earth.
So your reasoning behind having a ps4 and X1 is because they aren't available on Steam? The logic here is real... You could always purchase it from Uplay or go buy it from the retail store...much like ps4 and X1... What people fail to realize is Uplay will be used no matter if you own it on steam or Uplay. It will still ask you to login into uplay. Anyways... P.S It won't harm steam, there are still plenty of game companies going through steam, including Call of duty which sells millions of copies...frankly they are just cutting out a portion of their potential market...seeing as many ppl don't use uplay individually.
The Steam fanboys are out in force. Nevermind the fact that you still needed Uplay to play Farcry 3. Now that you can't buy from Steam, all you need is Uplay. It cuts out the middle man. Why is that such a bad deal?
I dont know HOW u got any of your information from my comment, please re-read it and think before you type.
It should. Steam sucks.
I'd suggest that Ubisoft's version of All Access isn't far behind this.
I hope so. But I don't think Steam distribution and an all access pass are mutually exclusive. Besides, EA haven't brought the Access service to the PC yet. Which is odd, considering they have complete control of their own platform on the PC (Origin), and a huge library of games that would make for one hell of a "vault".
PC gamers have historically displayed a general apathy towards yearly sports releases, which is really the biggest reason Access exists and the real value it adds for their repeat customers. I doubt it could coast on the strength of yearly military shooter releases.
According to EA it is a way to generate some revenue from their older catalogue that people are no longer interested in buying. The only value it really adds for the "must buy the annual sports game" crowd is a small discount on the digital version, and a 6 hour trial some days before it releases. I think most people with Access consider the real value to be the games in the vault (On the Xbox that's about 7 or 8 games right now). On the PC they could include the Mass Effect trilogy, Crysis trilogy, Dead Space trilogy, the first 2 Dragon Age games, PvZ Garden Warefare, Battlefield Everything, NFS Everything, and heaps more besides. I would think they could tempt a few people to part with £20 for that? PC gamers have already embraced digital marketplaces and the ownership issues that come with it, so I'd say they're ripe for something like EA Access. Side note (as it's ma last bubble), your reply above I'm glad you aren't using Ubisoft's failings as an excuse to pirate. If you had followed up your complaints with "that's why I pirate their games" I couldn't have respected what you said. But you are not that guy, so... good show.
who the fuck cares? you can still buy their games, you're GOING to buy their games.. and you can still get discounts via Amazon or G2A
Far Cry 4 has removed from the Xbox One marketplace too.
I'll try out Uplay then.
Why is Ubisoft tryingbto he EA?
Because EA is now trying to stop being EA.
That title is rhetorical.
Seems like they are shooting themselves in the foot. Steam is my portal to all games on my PC. If your game isn't in the marketplace I won't see it and therefore won't buy it
Has this even really been confirmed? That they are pulling it off Steam because they don't want to be on Steam? Looks like to me we're in the middle of a negotiation. (see how Origin recently added these Ubisoft games). As we know, or should, each developer agrees to sell their games on Steam or not. We've seen it many times before where a company will pull their games. We've seen it many times where those games can come back. Maybe Ubisoft pulled the games as the timeframe of their old contract was over, and as an additional negotiating position, they allowed their games to be pulled from Steam. Perhaps Steam gives Ubi a bigger cut for their games and they come back. Perhaps they don't and they are gone for an extended period of time, possibly forever. But with these games getting pulled off Steam, yet added to Origin, something makes me think that this is just a negotiation going on in public.
Yup more and more people from different countries around the world have said the new Ubisoft games have been removed from their steam store. This includes UK, US, Australia, Germany, Switzerland, Finland, Brazil, Denmark, Israel, Mexico, Belgium, Russia and Japan so far. Looks like they are pulling all their new games from steam worldwide. Personally I buy their games from cd key sellers and not directly from steam or uplay. It's cheaper and it still gets activated on uplay no matter where I buy them from. I'd rather pay £25 than £50 which is what Ubisoft are charging for their games now.
Games are back on Steam now..
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.