Games that use Ubisoft’s always-online DRM system ping these constantly to reassure the publishers that you’re not a pirate. That means that next week’s switchover will render Tom Clancy’s HAWX 2, Might & Magic: Heroes 6 and The Settlers 7 unplayable for an unknown period of time. The servers are set to go down on February 7. Ubisoft don’t say when they’ll be back up again.

Other games will be playable offline, as long as you’ve completed the one-time activation process. If you haven’t, you won’t be able to activate them for the duration of the downtime. Big recent releases like Assassin’s Creed: Revelations and Driver: Francisco, however, will stay online for the duration of the switch-over.

Ubisoft told us that their hyper-strict DRM restrictions (which extend to limited activations tied to your graphics card) are considered to be “a success.” They told us their anti-piracy measures had resulted in “a clear reduction in piracy of our titles which required a persistent online connection.” For many, next week’s server outages will only reinforce their decision to steer clear of Ubisoft’s games entirely.

I’m trying to play Batman: Arkham City on PC, an excellent game that was unfortunately developed in 1408 AD, the last time anyone alive didn’t know Games for Windows Live was universally hated. And it’s working – in fact, it’s working better than usual. It’s working without Games for Windows Live. That part of the game simply never starts – I’m not asked to log in, the Home key won’t summon it, the main menu option does nothing, and the game seems to function smoothly without it.

The problem is that this was a Games for Windows Live game when I started playing it, so my thirty-odd hours of progress are tied to my GFWL account. This new, otherwise excellent version of the game I’ve stumbled into has no memory of that – I’m starting from scratch.

In fact, it has no memory at all – I play for 15 minutes, and that progress is also gone when I next start it up. No errors and no warnings – it even leaves out the confirmation screen that normally warns you you’ll lose any progress since the last checkpoint. That would, after all, imply that it had saved at the last checkpoint.

And so, with the same screwed up face I wear when punching an explosive barrel to see if that ‘works’, I try to manually install Games for Windows Live.

This is one fat clown in a top hat I may never get to strangle again.

As you might have heard, PC gaming no longer warrants its own site for Microsoft. It’s games, so that makes it one of those Xbox things. gamesforwindowslive.com doesn’t even redirect there – it’s a page of classy “sponsored listings for goods and services” like jackpotjoy.com.

So I get the GFWL client from xbox.com, install it, and get an error. This is not unexpected. The neurotic error text even seems to anticipate that I’m probably on the verge of giving up already:

“A required Windows component is disabled on your machine. Do you want to learn how to fix this problem?”

… or is life too short?

Actually, Microsoft, since this is for official PC Gamer business: yes. I care, I have time, and I’m going to try to use your support process. I’m the person you were hoping didn’t exist.

I click ‘Help’, and immediately the program seems unsure how to proceed. After an awkward pause, it starts up Google Chrome and takes me to a blank white page reassuring me that I’m being redirected to the appropriate support page – but presenting me with another option to give up, just in case.

I get an error – this is not unexpected. It is, however, extremely funny.

They’ve actually taken the time to pose an Xbox avatar in a dismissive shrug. His cheerful smile says, “Oh well! Doesn’t really affect Xbox!” But his empty black irises, his blank flesh-coloured sclera, glare with a deeper corporate indifference. “YOU ARE NOT MONEY.” They say. “I FEEL NOTHING FOR YOU.”

Apparently I’ve found a glitch in the system! Well done me. With all that clever probing, including but not limited to attempting to actually play the game, I managed to catch them out! Thank God they seem so cool about it. I just need to look up error code 18307F760405E4F s:mGdrKQGKMfExOFYHmj2lJg== id:d2b83066-0f9f-4ba8-a833-abf86a9a2f03 req:89e81e05-998d-4ee7-8b7a-ccd2b5e058f8 and it’ll all be OK!

That’s when I notice the URL. Have a look at the URL.

xbox.com/en-GB/support/pc

This isn’t one error code’s obtuse solution page that’s missing, it’s the English support page for PC gaming. It’s an error. Error 18307… is that the whole support section for the PC has gone.

In this shot, Batman represents GFW Live, Mr Freeze represents Batman, and the railing represents the working classes.

I found it, eventually, by Googling. It’s a page divided into four sections:

Section 1: Is this really our fault? Please check. You’ll find that it isn’t.
Section 2: Here’s a list of people whose fault this might be.
Section 3: Maybe this is YOUR fault! Reinstall DirectX.
Section 4: “Did this solution solve your problem?”

There is no support for Games for Windows Live itself, since it has never been the cause of any problems in PC gaming.

So I’m still stuck in my Games For Windowless world, which would be nice except for the Arkham City thing. I still don’t know which essential Windows component I’m missing – is this because I uninstalled Chess Titans, Microsoft? Actually, don’t tell me. I think I’ll stay here.

Obviously not. However, according to Paradox Interactive CEO Fred Wester, we can’t aim our pitchforks and torches entirely at maniacally monolithic companies that erupt in a din of evil cackling and ominous lightning strikes each time someone’s booted back to a start screen. Business, he says, isn’t such a one-sided game.

“I think there’s a lot of politics, especially in bigger companies,” Wester said in an interview with GameSpy. “If you’re a CEO, you need to cover your back. And the people who ask, the board, know nothing about games. They’re there because they’re some investment company or something, and they ask ‘So what are you doing to protect our game from pirates?’ And then they can reply ‘We’re buying this solution from Sony.’

Even so, Wester finds the whole “solution” to be incredibly counter-productive from both a business and consumer-centric standpoint.

“I just can’t see why people are using DRM still,” he continued. “If you take something like Sony’s DRM, SecuROM – it’s a waste of money. It will keep you protected for three days, it will create a lot of technical support, and it will not increase sales. And I know this for a fact, because we tried it eight years ago, and it never worked for us. Two major reasons: it costs money and it makes you lose money, and the other is that it’s so inconvenient to customers.”

“Now, I see no reasonable explanation for why people keep on adding it. Especially the kind where you have to be online all the time, like Ubisoft. I think that’s, to me that’s 2003.”

“While it’s correct that copies of Anno include three activations and that changing hardware may trigger the need for reactivation, the vast majority of Anno customers never encounter this scenario. On the rare occasion when a customer does need additional activations, Ubisoft customer service is available to quickly resolve the situation, and we encourage those customers to contact us directly so that we can ensure they are able to continue to enjoy their game,” said the publisher in a statement.

Moreover, the draconian-even-by-Ubisoft’s-usual-standards DRM system doesn’t allow de-activations, so when you hand over one of your three installation cards, it’s out of your deck for good.

So then, stop me if you’ve heard this one before: Legitimate customers get treated like pirates, pirates get treated like kings, and sane human beings are left scratching their heads in confusion until they draw blood. Ubisoft, folks. Let’s give ‘em a hand.

I’ve fired off a mail to Ubisoft asking whether this is an intentional piece of extra armor plating for its DRM Voltron, or merely a glitch the publisher plans on patching out. Fingers crossed for the latter, though precedent’s not exactly on our side.

But that’s only one perspective. So, in the wake of the announcement that GOG’s version of Witcher 2 made a sizable stack of real, non-Monopoly money without any sort of DRM weighing it down, I decided to get in touch with CD Projekt. Read on for CEO and co-founder Marcin Iwinski’s thoughts on DRM schemes like Bohemia’s, why we should get rid of DRM altogether, how many Witcher 2 copies were pirated, and how piracy can even occasionally be beneficial.

PCG: For quite some time, CD Projekt RED’s been of the opinion that DRM isn’t necessary. The Witcher 2 – based on GOG sales numbers at least – seems to have vindicated your approach. Why, though? What made people want to buy it instead of pirating?

Marcin Iwinski: To answer this question properly, I have to go back in history a few years. I started CD Projekt with my high-school friend back in 1994. 1994 was a super wild time in terms of piracy, as this was the year when the software copyright laws were first established here.

From the very beginning our main competitors on the market were pirates. The question was really not if company x or y had better marketing or better releases, but more like “How can we convince gamers to go and buy the legit version and not to go to a local street vendor and buy a pirated one?” We of course experimented with all available DRM/copy protection, but frankly nothing worked. Whatever we used was cracked within a day or two, massively copied and immediately available on the streets for a fraction of our price.

We did not give up, but came up with new strategy: we started offering high value with the product – like enhancing the game with additional collectors’ items like soundtracks, making-of DVDs, books, walkthroughs, etc. This, together with a long process of educating local gamers about why it makes sense to actually buy games legally, worked. And today, we have a reasonably healthy games market.

In any case, I am not saying that we have eliminated piracy or there is not piracy in the case of TW2. There is, and TW2 was [illegally] downloaded by tens of thousands of people during the first two weeks after release. Still, DRM does not work and however you would protect it, it will be cracked in no time. Plus, the DRM itself is a pain for your legal gamers – this group of honest people, who decided that your game was worth the 50 USD or Euro and went and bought it. Why would you want to make their lives more difficult?

PCG: Can you offer any concrete numbers or percentages as far as Witcher 2 piracy goes?

MI: There are no stats available, but let’s make a quick calculation. I was checking regularly the number of concurrent downloads on torrent aggregating sites, and for the first 6-8 weeks there was around 20-30k ppl downloading it at the same time. Let’s take 20k as the average and let’s take 6 weeks. The game is 14GB, so let’s assume that on an average not-too-fast connection it will be 6 hours of download. 6 weeks is 56 days, which equals to 1344 hours; and with 6h of average download time to get the game it would give us 224 downloads, then let’s multiply it by 20k simultaneous downloaders.

The result is roughly 4.5 million illegal downloads. This is only an estimation, and I would say that’s rather on the optimistic side of things; as of today we have sold over 1M legal copies, so having only 4.5-5 illegal copies for each legal one would be not a bad ratio. The reality is probably way worse.

PCG: Even so, you’re hardly in dire straits. What about other developers, though? Do you think there’d be less piracy overall if everyone just dropped DRM entirely?

MI: In my almost 20 years in the industry, I have not seen DRM that really worked (i.e. did not complicate the life of the legal gamer and at the same time protect the game). We have seen a lot of different protections, but there are only two ways you can go: Either you use light DRM, which is cracked in no time and is not a major pain for the end-user, or you go the hard way and try to super-protect the game.

Yes, it is then hard to crack, but you start messing with the operation system, the game runs much slower and – for a group of legal gamers – it will not run at all. None of these solutions really work, so why not abandon it altogether?

PCG: Why do you think so many other developers and publishers are stuck on DRM that inconveniences paying customers just as much as pirates? I mean, their most vocal customers are shouting “No! This is terrible!” at the top of their lungs. So why is it taking so long for them to listen?

MI: Fortunately and unfortunately at the same time, games are becoming huge business. And as with every growing business, there are a lot of people coming in who… have no clue about games and could work in any other industry. They are not asking themselves the question “What is the experience of a gamer?” Or “Is this proposition fair?” But rather, they just look to see if the column in Excel adds up well or not, and if they can have a good explanation for their bosses.

As funny as this might sound, DRM is the best explanation, the best “I will cover my ass” thing. I strongly believe that this is the main reason the industry has not abandoned it until today, and to be frank this annoys me a hell of a lot. You are asking, “So why is it taking so long for them to listen?” The answer is very simple: They do not listen, as most of them do not care. As long as the numbers in Excel will add up they will not change anything.

I always encourage gamers to go and vote with their wallets. That’s the only way to enact real change, and I can already see it is changing. When we started GOG.com, the answer from publishers for selling their back-catalogue DRM-free was a brief and strong “NO WAY.” Meanwhile, today we have over 300 games, and there are newer games coming next year.

PCG: On that note, do you think DRM’s becoming less popular with developers and publishers? I mean, a lot of games are just using Steam now, and even Ubisoft finally got rid of its always online requirement.

MI: It is for sure becoming something to think about, something to consider as part of the gaming experience. It has still a way to go.

The social media revolution helps here a lot. Having all these places on Facebook, Twitter and forums where people post 24/7 – they can share their opinions much easier, faster and on a much larger scale. If they do not like how a certain game works, they can flame it in just a few hours, and that news makes its rounds quite quickly.

This is the only way to get the Excel guys moving. If they hear that they have a couple hundred or thousand negative comments on Amazon, Metacritic, Twitter, etc, they will most probably do something about it. Some of them already did.

“We are giving away most of the content for free because there’s no barrier to entry. To the users that are traditionally playing the game by getting it through Pirate Bay, we said, ‘Okay, go ahead guys. This is what you’re asking for. We’ve listened to you – we’re giving you this experience. It’s easy to download, there’s no DRM that will pollute your experience.’”

While Ghost Recon Online is exclusive to PC, Ubisoft’s other Ghost Recon game, Future Soldier, uses a traditional payment model and will only be available on console.

“We’re adapting the offer to the PC market. I don’t like to compare PC and Xbox boxed products because they have a model on that platform that is clearly meant to be €60’s worth of super-Hollywood content. On PC, we’re adapting our model to the demand.”

The perceived value of PC games is heavily affected by piracy, Arnoult says – both for players and publishers.

“When we started Ghost Recon Online we were thinking about Ghost Recon: Future Solider; having something ported in the classical way without any deep development, because we know that 95% of our consumers will pirate the game. So we said okay, we have to change our mind.

“We have to adapt, we have to embrace this instead of pushing it away. That’s the main reflection behind Ghost Recon Online and the choice we’ve made to go in this direction.”

It’s a different stance to that of Stanislas Mettra, Creative Director on console-exclusive Ubisoft title I Am Alive. In an interview with IncGamers, he questioned the value of porting games to the PC at all.

“Perhaps it will only take twelve guys three months to port the game to PC, it’s not a massive cost but it’s still a cost. If only 50,000 people buy the game then it’s not worth it.”

Both agree that it’s a question of commercial viability, but the difference in approach is alarming. While it’s great to see the Ghost Recon team treating the PC as a distinct platform with its own needs, we’d like to see that attitude reflected by Ubisoft as a whole.

Ghost Recon Online closed beta is currently active in France and Germany, and is due in the UK in the next few months.

It’s a bit of a turnaround from Ubisoft’s position this summer, when they told us that the always-online DRM was “a success” that had led to “a clear reduction in piracy of our titles which required a persistent online connection.” Thankfully for us, they didn’t listen to themselves.

And then Darkspore’s dark days happened. As originally discovered by RPS, Darkspore is an absolutely chilling example of what could possibly go wrong. For nine days, new players were completely unable to access the game they’d purchased. Nine days. Nine days of pleas on the game’s official forums. Nine days of moderators saying, “Please, be patient.” When your system’s supposed to keep you connected to players like never before, that level of distance is absolutely unacceptable.

But let’s face it: Darkspore is nowhere near as big as, say, Diablo III. Unless something goes horribly, catastrophically wrong, Blizzard won’t neglect its hell-borne hack ‘n’ slash until the actual End of Days. And so, truth be told, I’m not all that concerned about Blizzard’s games, given the level of support we’ve seen for WoW and and the always-on DRM of StarCraft II.

Diablo III isn't likely to see much downtime - but it could happen.

Darkspore, though, doesn’t have the kind of popularity or public visibility needed to make it a worthwhile long-term investment for its publisher. So – while depressing – it’s not entirely surprising that EA didn’t have some sort of giant red “Break glass in case of Darkspore emergency” button lying around. And therein lies the problem: What happens to these smaller games without huge followings as time takes its toll? EA, especially, has been known to shut down multiplayer servers altogether – sometimes for games as little as two-years-old.

Gamers, of course, have feared this kind of slow degradation for a while now, but imagining the big, bad boogieman and having him actually chase you down the hall, cleaver in hand, are two entirely different things. Now, it’s always possible for a game to pull a From Dust and patch out authentication requirements after launch. If server upkeep becomes a strain on bank accounts, then severing the server is an option (at least is some cases). But that takes work – especially when games are increasingly designed around the online requirement, and some games can’t survive a server-ectomy procedure.

So that’s the dilemma. Granted, Darkspore’s not quite at the point where it needs to make the call between either shutting down or cutting the cord – or at least, it shouldn’t be, having only released earlier this year – but the uncertainty makes its players’ plight all the more upsetting. As always, gamers and the press will speak up in favor of keeping games we paid for playable. The question remains, though: Will developers and publishers listen?

“Protection from piracy? Part of the content will be located on the server and downloaded as the game progresses. Permanent internet access is required. Text information, code and quests will be loaded through that connection.”

Later, speaking to Rock Paper Shotgun, GSC clarified that this was only one of many possibilities, saying:

“The idea of implementing DRM came in as a possible anti-piracy solution. You know the severe level of commercial piracy we have here in ex-USSR region. This said however, there is no firm decision to go for DRM with S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 as of now. Be assured, we do realize how uncomfortable this solution is for the players, so we’ll continue looking for most effective, yet acceptable for all, way of protecting the game by the time of its release.”

We at PC Gamer are no fans of Ubisoft’s online only DRM or the fact that Diablo 3 cannot be played offline and that sentiment still applies here. Online only DRM means that gamers can’t play the games they’ve paid for if their connection drops, something that happens even to the best of us.

While we realise that piracy in the ex-USSR is rife, the Stalker series is one that is popular all over the world, not just in its home region. Many of those who bought the game did so because of the amazing Stalker modding community, something that would likely no longer be possible with a portion of the code locked off on a server.

GSC are haven’t made a decision yet, but we for one certainly hope that they reconsider using a restrictive DRM system that would penalise legitimate customers and undermine the modders that have contributed so much to the Stalker series.

However, Ubisoft provides a test-case. We are almost two years into its aggressive attack on PC piracy. Recently, Ubisoft called its “always-on” DRM a success, claiming “a clear reduction in piracy.”

In terms of actual sales, however, the results seem decidedly mixed. Michael Pachter told Eurogamer that Ubisoft’s “PC game sales are down 90% without a corresponding lift in console sales.”

Pachter framed the problem in terms of piracy, as I’m sure Ubisoft frames the problem, but a 90% decline in PC sales is a catastrophic number. If piracy were the problem, then their “successful” DRM policy should have prevented such a free-fall.

Instead, PC gamers have stopped buying Ubisoft games. In fact, the decline of sales even calls into question the decline in piracy rates. All we know for sure is that Ubisoft have stopped people from playing their games. Full stop.

Ubisoft is committed to blaming piracy. It’s become an emotional issue. Here’s what the developer of Ubisoft’s Driver: San Francisco said before the game came out: “It’s difficult to get away from the fact that as a developer, as somebody who puts their blood, sweat and tears into this thing… And from the publisher’s point of view, which invests tens and tens and tens of millions into a product – by the time you’ve got marketing, a hundred million – that piracy on the PC is utterly unbelievable.”

I understand the outrage. It’s frustrating to see people enjoying your work without compensating you for it. But outrage can’t drive policy. The important question is, “Why aren’t more people buying my product?”

For answers, let’s look at Rock, Paper, Shotgun’s enthusiastic review of Driver: San Francisco. Alec Meer liked the game quite a bit: “It’s Quantum Leap meets Deadman, with more than a touch of Life On Mars, but… what’s important is that the game declares it is essentially one man’s fantasy up front, which means whatever it decides to do is absolutely inarguable. Moreover, that one man believes he is the greatest wheelman in history, so the fantasy panders to that and builds its rules around it.”

Sounds great! Except before I get to that amazing pitch, I encounter the following observations:

• Lousy graphics options, requiring adjusting videocard settings
• No support for 16:10 monitors
• “The net result on a high-res PC screen is a bland and outdated-looking game…”
• “There’s no sense that love has gone into Driver 5 on PC, just a game that’s been uncaringly dragged over…”

The review goes on to give me a dozen reasons why I should buy it, but it’s also given me a half-dozen reasons not to. It ends with a reminder that the DRM has an unreliable offline mode, and I need a connection to launch it. Not a major problem for me, but it raises the likelihood of annoyance down the road.

I’ll buy Driver: San Francisco. But not now. I’ll wait until it’s heavily discounted next year. My gaming budget isn’t so generous that I can afford to pay full-fare for bad ports, and bad ports, delayed releases, and harassing DRM are what define Ubisoft’s approach to the PC.

Pachter told Eurogamer, “”[There's] no public data to suggest that DRM works, but the fact that more companies are imposing it strongly suggests that they believe it works.” Nobody can estimate how many sales are lost due to piracy. The studies that do exist show that pirates tend to be steady customers. But despite the lack of solid evidence, the problem has to be piracy. Because the alternative is to acknowledge that Ubisoft has badly damaged its PC business and completely failed to convert pirates into paying customers.

Perhaps DRM does have a place, but Ubisoft has tried harder than any other publisher to solve this problem, and business has suffered. It may well be that piracy is not what ails them, and the secret to selling PC games is to make quality PC versions of multi-platform titles. But you don’t hear that from Ubisoft. What you hear is that they have the right to protect the products that they worked so hard to produce.

And they do have that right. But PC gamers work hard for their money, too, and they deserve full-featured games that let them have the best experiences possible on their chosen platform. They deserve a publisher that cares more about its customers than its resentments.

Some fans are threatening to boycott the series until the online activation requirement is removed. Sega tell Eurogamer that Football Manager has moved to Steam to combat piracy.

“Make no mistake, if a quarter of the people that usually pirate the game switch to purchasing Football Manager 2012, the sales of the game worldwide would more than double,” they say.

“This would lead to increased development budgets and more benefits for all of you who do buy the game.”

“We’ve taken this decision because we believe that the steps the consumer has to take are not excessive, and that as a one-time only measure with no tracking or reporting it is not too intrusive. Having worked with Steam for a few years now we also believe that their system is ever improving and gives Football Manager players a good service of free auto-updating, achievements and other great benefits without cost or hassle.”

In the scheme of things, a one-time online activation system seems relatively tame, especially in the light of Ubisoft’s always-online DRM system, and games like Diablo 3, which cannot be played offline, even in single player.

For many hardcore FM players, Football Manager will be one of the only games they play. It’s interesting to see the reaction of fans from a community less less desensitized to the growing extremity of many publishers’ anti-piracy solutions.

Are you a Football Manager player? Let us know what you think about FM 2012′s move to Steam.

Previously gamers would have to be online and connect to the Ubisoft servers when they started From Dust, although they could disconnect and continue as normal afterwards.

The DRM was one of many issues with From Dust’s launch, if you want our verdict on the game itself, read our From Dust review.

“None of the Diablo games have ever supported mods and primarily because being able to do modding along with high fidelity art that is also randomly generated is a really, really big challenge. And when we started the project we went ‘Well, if we’re going to do mods, we’re going to add a couple of years onto the product.’”

I know people look at Blizzard and say “Well, you guys are so big and have so much money you can do EVERYTHING for your games, right?” and the answer is no, we can’t. There’s so many things that we would like to do, that…time and resources; they’re real for us as well, so that was one of the things where we said ‘You know what? Diablo’s never supported mods.’”

Of course, it’s never supported broadband connections or real-money transactions either…

Regardless of this, we’d be stunned not to see any mods hooking into the game in various ways, but be careful. Diablo’s fiery wrath may have nothing on a server watching out for any naughtily extra code.

A post from Ubisoft on their forums, spotted on Eurogamer, says that a patch will arrive in approximately two weeks to remove the start up authentication procedure. They say that the development time is needed to ensure that players’ game saves, currently stored on Ubisoft’s servers, are relocated to users’ hard drives before the servers are switched off.

“Once the patch is ready, players who already have the game will automatically receive the update on their next login and subsequent game sessions will be 100 per cent offline,” reads the forum post.

The turnaround follows initial confusion over From Dust’s DRM system before its release. A forum post from a Ubisoft employee announced that From Dust would not need an internet connection to play, which turned out to be entirely inaccurate. Players who bought the game based on that premise have since been seeking refunds from Ubisoft and Steam.

Ubisoft don’t mention whether the patch will address any of the other problems that players have had with crashes, bugs and a lack of graphical options.

If you want to know what the game behind the DRM is like, read our From Dust review.

After a last minute delay, From Dust is finally out, and while it doesn’t require a constant internet connection, you will need to be hooked up to the web to launch the game. RPS note that the Ubisoft forum post has since been changed to say “‘From Dust’ requires an internet connection when you start the game.”

That’s not the only problem. Players have had problems getting From Dust to load, and many more have been complaining about a lack of graphical options, no anti-aliasing and a 30fps cap.

Ubisoft have since posted asking players experiencing problems with From Dust to contact customer support. “Reporting the issues to them, is the first step to them creating a patch,” they say. The Ubisoft forum manager recommends that players interested in getting a refund should also contact Ubisoft support.

To find out what the game underneath the controversy is like, check out our From Dust review.

Our man Graham is out at GamesCom in Cologne at the moment, seeing The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim. He asked Bethesda’s vice president of PR Pete Hines whether the game would use Games for Windows Live – a DRM system that asks players to log in, and ties downloadable content and savegames to your online account.

Hines says no: it is published under the Games for Windows label, but it won’t use the Live part.

There was some concern back in June when the collector’s edition was announced, showing the PC version of the game with partly obscured Games for Windows branding on the box. It’s a huge relief to confirm we won’t have to tangle with the maddeningly unreliable GFWL.

I got to play Skyrim on Monday, but I’m not allowed to tell you anything about it yet. I am, however, booking a certain week in November off.

Ubisoft have recently made a habit of delaying their games at the last minute. From Dust was the most recent victim of a last minute delay. That’s now due to come out on August 17.

PCG: Why did you decide to implement an auction house system instead of typical microtransactions, which have pretty much been turning everything they touch into gold lately?

Bridenbecker: Really, what you’re talking about there is the hallmark of what Blizzard’s all about. We really try and get into what’s in the best interest of players. And any time you introduce that business-to-consumer relationship, it muddles the waters some. So the person starts to think “Why is Blizzard doing this? They’re obviously doing it because it’s in the best interest of the business.” But if it’s something where it’s player-to-player, it actually takes away some of the questions as to why we’re doing it. Just by the very definition of player-to-player, it shows that it’s actually for the players. It’s about the players.

PCG: Obviously, though, monetizing virtual goods is a touchy subject. Are you expecting any fan backlash? I mean, your fans have been known to keep pitchforks and torches stuffed in their giant foam “Blizzard is number one” fingers…

Bridenbecker: No so much, no. Because the players want it. They’ve shown in the past that there’s a demand to buy items. And from our perspective, what we determined was that we needed to provide a safe and secure environment for that demand. By putting it in the game—integrating it and providing it in a way where we’re really just facilitating it—it really opens it up for them. I think everybody’s going to be really happy with it.

PCG: Given the success of free-to-play games and the premium society in general now places on digital, well, everything, do you think the notion that virtual items aren’t worth real money is antiquated?

Bridenbecker: Well, one of the things that’s unique about what we’ve come up with is that players don’t have to use it. It’s completely optional. We provide a couple different facilities for players who feel like the real money aspect somehow taints the experience. We’ve got a gold-based auction house [as well]. So those players are going to be able to avail themselves in that gold-based auction house. And then for players who are excited about purchasing items or even selling them, they’ll be able to use the real money auction house.

PCG: So, with Battle.net, you’ve got your own storefront/network that binds all your games’ communities together. But then, over on the other side of Activision, there’s Call of Duty: Elite, which does many of the same things, but for different games. Elsewhere, meanwhile, there’s Origin, Steam, and all their ilk. Do you think social features are becoming overly stratified and proprietary?

Bridenbecker: Yeah, it’s a great question. I mean, it’s a really unique time in the industry. You’ve got all the various social landscapes that are cropping up. I do believe that players are always going to want to gravitate toward the games. And individual game networks that provide social networking capabilities just enhance that overall quality. So the fact that there happen to be different products isn’t that much of a concern. The fact that I have different social networks in those products is really not that big of a deal.

PCG: Diablo III is following in StarCraft II’s footsteps and going online-only. Is it possible, though, that you might be pushing online functionality a bit too hard? I mean, what about the players who just want to tune out the world? If they, say, slay a big boss and then a chat bubble suddenly pops up, doesn’t that sort of ruin the moment?

Bridenbecker: I don’t think that individuals want to isolate themselves and be solitary cave people. But I definitely believe that individuals prefer to play in more isolated environments at times. That doesn’t necessarily have to compete with the goal of having things online. The capabilities that get presented when you push people into an online connected environment are so much broader. It’s like Rob [Pardo] was talking about: Imagine you have a world where you want to play in an entirely single-player environment. You go through and you level up your character and you get all these awesome item drops and so forth. Then you say, “OK, I do want to play with my buddy.” Well, guess what? We have to make you re-roll a new character because we can’t guarantee [a lack of cheating or hacking]. In an online environment, we can do that.

PCG: Is there any way to make sure that people can’t bug you, though? To essentially replicate a completely single-player experience even though you’re required to be online?

Bridenbecker: There’s definitely a question as to how much an individual is participating in the community and how much you award them the option to say, “I’m no longer a participant.” I mean, the reality is that most people, when they’re in a game and they say that they’re busy, other players are going to respect that. If somebody happens to intrude, you know, it’s your friend. Just tell them, “Hey man, when I’m busy, leave me alone.”

PCG: Do you have an overarching plan for Battle.net as a whole? An idea of what you’d like it to evolve into? For instance, would you like to expand it to include more games—say, from other developers or publishers?

Bridenbecker: Our main focus is enriching Blizzard titles. We definitely have had conversations about the best way to evolve Blizzard titles. Could that lead into a different [publisher/developer] world? You know, who knows what the future holds? But right now, no.

Senior producer Alex Mayberry says there were many reasons for the decision, including the prevention of cheating. Since players can buy and sell items for real money, any way of cheating to make or acquire better ones would be very lucrative – and unfair.

“It’s the trend that we’ve been moving towards,” Alex says. “Obviously StarCraft 2 did it, WoW authenticates also. It’s kind of the way things are, these days. The world of gaming is not the same as it was when Diablo 2 came out.”

I check with him to be absolutely sure: there’s no way to play without being online? “There’s no offline play, you have to be connected to the internet.”

The anti-cheat reason makes sense, but why not permit an offline mode and keep it separate from the online game?

“We thought about this quite a bit,” says executive producer Rob Pardo. “One of the things that we felt was really import was that if you did play offline, if we allowed for that experience, you’d start a character, you’d get him all the way to level 20 or level 30 or level 40 or what have you, and then at that point you might decide to want to venture onto Battle.net. But you’d have to start a character from scratch, because there’d be no way for us to guarantee no cheats were involved, if we let you play on the client and then take that character online.”

“Now, that doesn’t mean you can’t play a game by yourself – of course you can. You can go into and start any game that you want, you’ll just be connected to the Battle.net servers, and we can authenticate your character.”

If you’re finding this reasoning weak, you’re not alone. The more believable reason to deny players any kind of offline mode would be to prevent piracy. I asked Alex if that was the reason.

“One of them, yes.”

This week, we learned that Driver: San Francisco will have Ubisoft’s always-online DRM system. The From Dust Steam entry does list the Ubisoft Online Service as third party DRM, but it looks as though it’s a less stringent version.

Ubisoft told us yesterday that they see their DRM system as “a success,” saying that it’s led to “a clear reduction in piracy of our titles which required a persistent online connection.”

Ubisoft see the DRM as a success. Speaking to us earlier today, a Ubisoft representative admitted that the developer has seen “a clear reduction in piracy of our titles which required a persistent online connection, and from that point of view the requirement is a success”.

Ubisoft have traditionally been the developer with some of the harshest DRM in the industry. In the games that use their always online “connected services”, players can no longer to play if no internet connection is detected. The publisher first implemented this always-online DRM with Settlers 7. Since then, it’s featured in Silent Hunter V and Assassin’s Creed 2 and Assassin’s Creed: Brotherhood.

Sadly, legitimate players often take the brunt of such security measures. Intermittent internet connections and server issues at Ubisoft’s end can stop PC Gamers from playing the game entirely. Not cool.

Similarly frustrating measures were also introduced in the recent Super Street Fighter IV: Arcade Edition, where offline players were restricted to playing a small selection of the characters. Capcom later withdrew the DRM after fan criticism.

Driver: San Francisco is out on August 30 in the US, and September 2 in Europe. You can read our preview here.

This marks the return of one of the most controversial DRM systems of recent years. Ubisoft started using always-online DRM with Settlers 7, and included it in a few other titles including Silent Hunter V and Assassin’s Creed 2. Players with flaky internet connections struggled to play, and at were at one point locked out of their games for days when Ubisoft’s servers suffered problems.

It looked as though Ubisoft had decided to tone down the always-online system when they removed it from Assassin’s Creed Brotherhood, but it’s back in full force. A note on the Steam pre-order page states that “Ubisoft requires a permanent Internet connection to play this video game at all times.”

Driver: San Francisco is out on August 30 in the US, and September 2 in Europe. You can read our preview here.

Steam versions use Steam DRM, no other DRM is added.

Non-Steam versions (digital or retail disc) are as follows:

• No disc check, you do not need the disc in drive to play.
• No limit on the total number of PCs you can install and play the game on.
• There is a limit to the number of unique/different PCs that can start/play the game within a time window [5 PCs in 24hrs].
• Each install requires logging in to your EA account to verify game ownership.
• You can play offline but the game will require a login check after a select period of days.

 
Dragon Age 2 will also use EA’s Release Control system to stop anyone from playing the game before release. Bioware outline that the program won’t install anything on your machine, and will completely remove itself once the release date has passed.

Doesn’t seem too bad, then. Though regular online verification may prove to be tricky for some. Bioware haven’t yet announced how long the game can be played offline before requiring another online check

Dragon Age 2 is set to be released on March 8 in the US and March 11 in Europe. The game’s now available to pre-order, too.

[via VG247]

Before it all kicked off, PC Gamer sat down with GOG co-founder Marcin Iwinski and Managing Director Guillaume Rambourg to discover the story behind their relaunch, and how they convince publishers to release their games without DRM, how they combat piracy, and their holy mission to improve PC gaming. Warning: this interview contains Poles explaining themselves using slightly awkward metaphors.

To re-iterate – this interview took place before GOG closed their site.

Rich McCormick: So… what’s going on?

Guillaume Rambourg: Ah, what a question to start with. Next week we will finally bring back Baldur’s Gate to millions of users, which is quite a big achievement and we’re really, really thrilled about it. We’ll be launching a brand new version of GOG.com with new features and new design and many many things, I think you’ll have more questions about it.

Marcin Iwinski: I’m really excited about Baldur’s Gate, because historically GOG is part of the CD Projekt Group, and Baldur’s Gate was the first major game for us in our Polish business, years back when it was released. It was fully localised in Polish and was a foundation for the growth of gaming in Poland. It’s a very emotional connection. Baldur’s Gate enabled us to really make gaming massive in Poland, so what I really hope is that Baldur’s Gate will be the same for GOG; will make it massive and show people the good old gaming is really cool. I think Baldur’s Gate is one of the best games you can pick.

Guillaume Rambourg: There is something I’m very curious about, which is that currently, if you want to buy Baldur’s Gate you have to go off to eBay and [it is] really, really expensive, and even after buying a copy you are not even sure if the game is going to be running fine on modern operating systems. So we’ll bring back the game at a decent price, fully remastered for Windows, and I’m wondering if gamers will be willing to play it again.

Rich McCormick: How do you actually go about getting publishers to sign off on this? How do you get a game like Baldur’s Gate?

Marcin Iwinski: Well, we put on the hat and the shoes, you know? And we knock on their doors for two years, walking the path, you know? Essentially, this one was the most complex games we’ve had. I think early discussions started probably two years ago, and what is most challenging, aside from making the game compatible, is to convince the [publishers of the] DRM free model. But I think how GOG works is step by step convincing every single publisher out there. We just bring revenue and make gamers happy, offering them extremely good value.

But then you have to look at all of the more corporate considerations: who owns what and if they are not, you know, under restructuring and reorganisation or something. And [with] Atari we historically go a long way back, because they were the original publisher of The Witcher, and right now with the Witcher 2 we have a distribution deal with Atari in the US, so we have very strong ties. But still, part of the company will [be sold] – it’s all complicating things – and then the guys from GOG.com are knocking on their door and asking “Hey, we are doing good old games, so we can wait, but maybe it’s time that we could make a deal”. So at the beginning of the year we came up with a deal for the original Atari stuff, so original games like Archon, Orion and whatnot and then of course the next big priority was to have the Hasbro deal.

Rich McCormick: Are there any games that you want to get on GOG but can’t because the publishers have collapsed?

Guillaume Rambourg: In the last two years we have managed to sign a couple of big publishers, and I would say that every big publisher we have signed was perceived as a bottle opener, so step by step we build up our reputation, we show that our values are making sense for users and for publishers, that they can monetise old games and so on, and so you are right, we are still running after a couple of key publishers who we have to convince, but we hope that Baldur’s Gate will be the next bottle opener.

Marcin Iwinski: What we are planning to do is send them free download codes and say, “Please enjoy Baldur’s Gate here, and [get in touch] if you’d like to have your games on GOG and available legally to all its users.” Because the thing with old games is that in a lot of cases you cannot get a legal copy, unless you want to buy a collector’s edition or an old boxed copy on eBay. It costs a lot of money and ususally you have a problem with it working, so there is no revenue stream for publishers and there’s plenty of people who want to enjoy these games. I mean, how hard is it right now to buy the older Atari/Hasbro RPGs in the UK? It’s not that easy to get it retail.

Rich McCormick: Yeah. The only other option would be to pirate it.

Marcin Iwinski: Yeah and then I think people are really reaching for it and then quite often pirating, quite often it’s abandonware. You know, the legendary Hasbro/Atari RPGs, they were huge so you still have a chance to get them, but some titles were not that that active commercially. They were really great games but you really have no chance whatsoever to buy them anywhere outside of GOG.

Rich McCormick: Getting it running on the operating system is always the hardest part.

Marcin Iwinski: The funny thing is that when we making deals with some partners our main concern was, “We are very happy to make a deal with you, but we have a tiny little problem, we don’t have anything for the games, including the game itself. Can you get them?”. That’s the funny thing. Looking ten years back, the publishers, the decision makers, they couldn’t imagine, and we couldn’t blame them for that, that in ten years somebody would be willing to sell this stuff. I think that’s a really huge advantage of digital distribution.

Guillaume Rambourg: When you knock on doors asking for rights to certain games, and the games are old, you have to convince them to dedicate some resources on the legal side to clear up the rights, to look for the rights, and so on. As I stressed before, it’s just a question of legitimacy. GOG has built up some legitimacy and thanks to it we are convincing companies to look in their attic, to remove some dust and to trust us to take those old games to today’s users.

Rich McCormick: Have any old developers thanked you for putting their games on GOG?

Guillaume Rambourg: We have direct deals with developers, and that’s another beauty with GoG because again, the titles are really old and the rights have quite often reverted back to the original creators. Then we have the opportunity, instead of making one big deal with the publisher, to go to the developer and say “We are huge fans of your games, let’s make a deal together.” It’s two different worlds because, you know, publishers are publishers. They have big structures and they have to take care of their business but, there is a good example. On Thursday we are releasing Age of Wonders, which is a game from Triumph studios, and basically the rights for those games, the three games of that series, they used to belong to Take Two, and those guys they got back the rights, and they approached us as developers. “Guys, can we have those games on GOG?”

Marcin Iwinski: One of the first developers we sat with was Charles Cecil for the Broken Sword series, and he’s a great guy. It’s really a pleasure to do business with him. It’s part of the cool factor of building GOG.com that you can be in touch with such people, and these games, you know, some of them still have excellent graphics, but it’s more because they’re great and extremely playable games, and that’s the beauty.

Rich McCormick: When you release a game you tend to package it in with additional materials. How do you track them down?

Guillaume Rambourg: It’s a lot of digging, a lot lot lot of digging. The thing is we have a design team on board and they are extremely creative and productive. Plus, our testing team, they still have many, many copies of old games in their attic at home. They are collecting games, so it is a lot of hunting, digging, and then a lot of work. When you have assets for an old game, you have them in low resolution and you have to rework everything to make it in a decent format, right? So it’s a lot lot lot of digging, but for us it’s not hard. Beyond being a business, I would say we have a theological mission to promote the works of gaming, and for us bundling games with free goodies, it’s not hard, because this is the way we can convey the right message. Which is that games can be adorable, they can be lovable if you put the passion into it, and that we put soundtracks, wallpapers and so on directly benefits the passion around the products on GOG.

Rich McCormick: What is it about old games that draws you to them?

Marcin Iwinski: To elaborate a little bit more on where the idea comes from, we originate from Poland where the PC market is probably 70% of the business. It was more two years ago and we were already selling a lot of back catalogues, something Sold Out was doing in the UK two years ago. So we’re selling millions of these budget games and budget editions at retail here in Eastern Europe were really big stuff.

Something like Baldur’s Gate Gold Edition, we had it, and it was very reasonably priced. It was first of all a great offer for the end user, but also an education, a chance to tell the gamer, “This is a legal copy, it costs only a few quid and it’s a really good deal.” Looking at the piracy history in Poland, quite often that was the first legal game somebody would buy, so it became remarkably successful and educated people: “This is your first cheap game, maybe you will reach for the mid price afterwards, maybe you will reach for the full price.”

And hence the need for GOG.com. There are all these new games. If you look at Steam or Direct2Drive, the business is about new games, so either it’s a big game that’s just released, or it’s a massive promotion of something, this is pretty much how the business model works. For us, the business model is more long-term sale. It’s about rediscovering the gems of gaming, really, and that’s a starting point for a lot of gamers, especially the ones who don’t have the highest specs to run the new games. But also for people who remember the old games and would like to play them, and it’s much more affordable than buying new games. On top of that, with older games it was much easier to do the DRM free model, which was sort of the base of the concept.

[Continued on next page]

“Note, the date of the conference is probably 22nd, early Wednesday evening. Information about this soon on GOG.com (please do not panic after reading the information contained there:)”

If you re-read the doom-and-gloom message on GOG.com in light of this, it never actually says the closure is permanent for the foreseeable future. The terms “cannot remain in its current form” and “putting this era behind us as new challenges await” could refer to something else. We’ll have an interview with the Good Old Games guys up this Thursday the 23rd, to clear it up.

In the meantime, if this is a hoax, what do you think? Over the line?

Click to deploy the enlarge-o-tron

Here’s my rundown of the various classes.

The Doctor

• He’s a bit behind on his hippocratic oath.
• He has a syringe. You don’t want what’s in the syringe.
• He dresses like a bird highwayman.
• Weakness: his balls.

The Priest

• This is a mad priest with a sword.
• Which means that he’s some bald man who says latin things after he cuts you up.
• If, by freak chance, you get hit by lightning while running from him, he’ll probably take the credit.
• Weakness: dress up like a schoolgirl and stab him while he’s processing the strange feelings in his tummy.

The Courtesan

• Prostitute by night, assassin by… also night.
• She’s got a fan! It’s probably deadly! Or it does nothing.
• Agile, fast, nimble, dexterous, quick, speedy, and good at stabbing a lot of things in rapid succession.
• Weakness: Richard Gere.

The Executioner

• A big man covered in blood with a large axe.
• Also has a smaller backup axe.
• Doesn’t mind stealth, as long as people have the decency to keep it at home.
• Weakness: Presumably he can be killed?

The RUSE team released this message aimed squarely at PC gamers:

“When R.U.S.E. is released in September, it will benefit from Valve’s Steamworks API to offer the best community experience to players. Consequently, a Steam account and Internet connection will be required to activate the game, as per Steam policy. For this reason, R.U.S.E. will not use the Ubisoft protection. Single player can be played offline.”

Ubisoft’s controversial DRM, which requires a constant internet connection at all times to play even singleplayer games (and will sometimes prevent you from saving your game if your connection drops, booting you to the menu), has always been a bad idea. We’ve made sure to make a stink about the DRM when we review Ubisoft games that use it. From their point of view, it’s the only thing preventing anyone from pirating their games. From the pirates’ point of view, it’s the best thing about pirating their games. From PC Gamer’s point of view, it makes it very hard for us to recommend an excellent game if the slightest nibble at your broadband cable (or their servers) can kick you out of a single player session and ditch your progress.

This is the first major crack in Ubisoft’s resolve – their DRM must be hurting sales, and they’re worried about their cerebral strategy game because it doesn’t have the widespread appeal of, say, Assassin’s Creed, that it’d need to push through the anti-DRM picket lines.

It could also be that they’ve hit upon an idea that’s something like this:

[via UbiLeak]

Download the MP3 here, subscribe here, and find our older podcasts here.

Tim, Tom, baby Boomer and Graham. Taking the pic: Craig.

One cannot simply expend a move action towards Mordor!

It’ll contain a map, pewter dragon, a poster, and the Hiergemenon – the game’s encyclopedia, in book form. Brad calls it “Half D&D monster manual and half lore book.” It’s got maps and artwork, race profiles, short stories, and a detailed breakdown of the game’s universe.

I remember when my brother moved out, we agreed that he could keep the Morrowind collector’s edition pewter Ordinator figurine and map, and I would keep the game. I can’t believe I was so stupid. Do you care about maps and pewter figures? And how does a map work for a game with a randomised landscape, anyway?

Elemental: War of Magic is a turn based strategy from the developers of Galactic Civilisations 2 – think of it like a GalCiv game pretending to be an Ultima game, with a bit of Populous thrown in. We’ll have an in-depth preview in next month’s issue.

• Release: August 24, 2010
• Publisher: Stardock
• Developer: Stardock
• Website: ElementalGame.com

Revolutionary tech in Fable 3 allows even the dog to feel dismay at Microsoft.

Cross format development is now so inexpensive, it makes zero sense to push money into a single format exclusive. At the show, that was quickly made clear. The vast, vast majority of the major third-party publishers’ showings concentrated on games that are playable on all formats, and will be available on the day of launch through Microsoft’s Games for Windows Live store.

Yet you’d be hard-pressed to tell from Microsoft’s show presence. The PC wasn’t mentioned once during the Microsoft E3 press conference. On the show floor, they built a vast green booth, surrounded by glass pods in which gamers, analysts and journalists petted pretend animals or jumped and down on boats. There was no sign of the Games for Windows intiative anywhere. Nor did they do any PR to counter the signs of developers jumping ship: at the show, Fallout: New Vegas and Kane and Lynch 2 both ditched the Games for Windows Live service in favour of the Steamworks.

Fallout: New Vegas is a boot, stamping on Steve Ballmer's face, forever.

From Microsoft, there were no PC related announcements, no PC games on display, and no interest in promoting the PC as a gaming platform.

The funniest part of this, though, is that they were embarrased by their rivals from console land. Sony Online Entertainment, the online arm of Sony, brought multiple new PC games to the show. They had exactly the same goal that obsesses Microsoft – to broaden the market for games – but were doing it through great software, rather than flawed hardware.

Take a game like Star Wars: Clone Wars Adventures, Sony’s kiddie friendly Star Wars MMO. While Microsoft showed off a lightsaber game that required their (rumoured) $150 dollar camera toy, Sony brought a brand new franchise to the table. While it’s clearly not being aimed at PC Gamer readers, it is gloriously well presented, and remarkably innovative. It’s based on the Clone Wars cartoon, but the missions in the game are based on what happens in the TV series each week. I’d bet that within the first year of release, Clone Wars Adventures will hook millions more gamers than Microsoft’s entire Kinect catalogue.

Crysis 2: playable on consoles. Still sexier on PC.

PC games were everywhere at E3: there was barely anything that wasn’t playable on PC. The PC had the best format exclusives at the show: games like Civilization 5, The Old Republic, and The Witcher 2. And the PC had the best looking games at the show. Nothing will close to Crysis 2 running on a high-end system this year.

Yet Microsoft just didn’t seem to care. That to me, as a journalist and gamer, seems shameful.

"Your conditioner smells wonderful, PIG."

One of K&L2′s best-looking features is a revamped version of the first game’s Fragile Alliance multiplayer mode, in which you and your team cooperatively rob a bank, then (optionally) turn on one another during your escape to take the loot for yourself. The mode was the best part of K&L 1, but it was nearly impossible to play online due to GFWL’s crappiness. I asked IO Interactive game director Kim Krogh if I’d have the same experience this time around.

“No, for that reason. We’re using Steamworks,” he said. Awesome. Music to my ears. Steamworks is Valve’s free set of tools for integrating multiplayer and copy protection via Steam – it’s a lot more reliable, and a lot less intrusive.

So Kane & Lynch 2 is off to a great start: we’ll be able to play it. The original Kane & Lynch: Dead Men wasn’t a terrible game, though without the review scandal surrounding it, it might have been forgotten by now. This one, I think, people will remember for its merits as a shooter. The gunplay feels much more kinetic and powerful, the cover system is smooth and easy to use, and cover objects (and many walls) disintegrate under heavy fire. The way you get knocked down when you’re hit, but continue to fire from the ground, makes you feel like you’ve really taken a bullet.

Screenshot of Kane & Lynch 2 or cellphone picture of Shanghai? You decide.

The clever camera effect is still impressive. IO Interactive is going for a found-footage look, as if it were shot through a cheap cell phone camera and uploaded to YouTube. When you’re hit, the screen shows distortion and bad compression artefacts; looking at a bright ceiling light sprouts a vertical banding effect. There’s no telling if it’ll start to grate as the game wears on, but in the short time I played it, I loved it. IO says it takes them around eight hours to get through the campaign, which puts the player in the shiny suit of the unhinged Lynch and the AI (or optional co-op buddy) controlled Kane providing cover.

Kane & Lynch 2: Dog Days is out in August.

The hidden wrist-blade here is that the game will be using Ubisoft’s Online Services Platform, the infamous “Ubi-DRM” (assuming Yves Guillemot doesn’t get visited by three spirits and shown the error of his ways before release).

EXT. OLD LONDON TOWN. YVES is hanging out of his WINDOW wearing a NIGHT CAP. There is a BOY in the STREET.

YVES: “You boy! What’s today?”
BOY: “Today, sir? Why, it’s November 15th, the day before Brotherhood comes out!”
YVES: “THERE’S STILL TIME!”

When asked what he thought of Ubisoft’s controversial always-on DRM system, Namco Bandai Partners VP Olivier Comte told CVG news-lord Andy Robinson, “I think it’s a good [approach] for one reason: I have no alternative today.” Namco Bandai are publishing Witcher 2.

When Witcher fans got wind of it, they flooded CD Projekt with worried emails. The Polish developer and founder of DRM-free digital distribution platform Good Old Games updated their flagship game’s facebook page to assure fans that they shouldn’t expect The Witcher 2 to come packaged with draconian DRM. They said:

“Our distributors commented the Ubisoft-like DRM security solutions, and we’re receiving a massive feedback about applying such in The Witcher 2. There’s nothing to worry about, as nothing is decided yet. And still, it’s a private opinion. You know Cd Projekt RED’s opinion about DRM, right? ;-)”

The Witcher 2 will be a traditional singleplayer RPG. We’re glad you don’t have to be online to play the thing.

[via GamePolitics.com]

Fallout 3 used Games for Windows Live. BethSoft have made a conscious decision to back away from that platform. “We made the decision to use Steam after looking at all the various options out there and decided that it provided the best, least intrusive experience for PC gamers. We think you’ll agree,” Bergman said in response to a fan question yesterday. He also stressed the benefits of Steam as he saw them, particularly explaining that “you can install the game on as many systems as you want (with no restrictions!), and you do not have to be online to play the game after your initial activation.”

Our editorial stance on GfWL isn’t a pretty one. In issue 207, Section Ed Tom Francis spoke for all of us when he called Microsoft’s games non-service a “blight on our platform,” particularly complaining that it “seriously intruded on our singleplayer games” by preventing you from saving your game when not connected to Live.

[via Voodoo Extreme]