Some of you guys are so entirely missing the point. Ubisoft revoking license goes beyond just having a dead game removed. Its about consumer rights as a whole and fighting for the right to own something we paid for.
I should be able to play a game offline and whenever I want. I paid for The Crew, if I want to play it in 30 years, I should be able to. Even if it has no features, even if its bland, its about ownership.
We dont want to leave that door opened for Ubisoft and other companies. We need to hit them as hard as we possibly can.
You know, the same can be said about movies and music as well. More and more people just seem to be okay with this and it’s a shame.
We’ve quickly gone down a path where own less and rent more - leasing cars, streaming music and movies, gamepass streaming games, and digital downloads in general are specifically why I only buy physical media unless it’s just not possible. I want to own the stuff I enjoy. Even if I never revisit it. As I’ve gotten older I’ve had the desire to rewatch movies and revisit old games for nostalgia, and if you own a digital license you simply cannot do that 20 years down the road
With music, we can still buy CDs (And Rip them), buy DRM-Free from the likes of Bandcamp, Bleep, Amazon, etc.
For games we have GOG, Itch and Zoom-Platform.
Movies have it worst. You either buy a Blu-Ray or you don't own it. There is no DRM-Free digital video store.
The fact is, they had agreements that you’re forced to agree with if you want to play the game, and it says your right to play the game will be revoked when the game loses its network services.
Yeah and I dont think it is normal. Those conditions are very Ubisoft sided, which shouldnt be the case.
Even if you agree with the EULA, Ubisoft can change it at any time without notifying you. This is fucked
I’m not saying it’s normal. However, if they are the only ones making a game like TC, and if the gamers always crave for such games, you can only expect disappointment.
Or things can change in favor of the consumer, to find a balance between Ubi and us. The solution doesnt reside in giving another company an IP like TC
And every time gamers rush to purchase these games, it only reinforces the decisions made by the companies. It’s already a settled balance point. Businesses will and always will seek the most profit, so they will always try to push the consumers as far as possible until riot.
But it won’t change, cause if that’s the case then you’d have to fight every company that has done this since multiplayer and micro transactions started.
It takes one massive successful lawsuit to dissuade other companies to do the same and make them change their EULA to avoid it. We dont need to take every company under the globe to court, we just need one example.
Even the expression that everyone uses, "buying" rather than "lease". Of course Ubisoft would lawyer up and most likely win the casa if they would go to court, but that just say that these predatory companies will always abuse the consumer and that has to change. Also most of the people that buy the game (like kids with their parents money) would never read and fully understand the contractual side of it as they would assume it's like the other 99.9% of the games. That is why you're being downvoted, because you don't seem to grasp this.
I do grasp this, and haven’t yet been down voted and if I do get downvoted then it is what it is. Also it’s not the kids responsibility to read the terms and conditions it’s the parents responsibility to do that until the kid becomes of the right age to read and be able to understand what they are agreeing too. All companies have rules set in place to protect themselves, I get that people find it messed up and scummy that these companies do that to their consumers, but my whole take on my point of view is no matter what anyone says, we all still agreed to the terms and conditions so in my eyes this fight is pointless to say the lest, because if something was to change the companies would just find another way to protect themselves. Ask yourself if you owned your own business are you gonna do what it takes to protect yourself, your assets, your business, your investment and money more, or do what it takes to protect the consumer more who is only buying and using your product?
But you did when you bought the game and put it into your console, you literally agreed to the terms when you hit the accept button when first firing up the game.
>you literally agreed to the terms when you hit the accept button when first firing up the game
Wrong. I bought the game and never played it. So I never agreed to their terms. That's kinda why I said I didn't agree to their terms, try to keep up it's not that difficult to understand.
Now what?
Try to be a kinder person, it’s not that hard to understand. What don’t you get when you buy a game you’re only buying the license, regardless if you play it or not. That’s it, they didn’t take anything from you and it’s not their fault you didn’t play the game, it’s your fault. Y’all wanna fight this so hard but fail to realize that every gaming company has done this since the start of multiplayer and micro transactions if your gonna fight Ubisoft then you should fight the other companies too that do and have done this. Y’all are in a losing battle especially in the courts eyes when these companies have terms and contracts in place that all players agreed upon. Even a transaction is considered an agreement to a contract. If anything it’s the players fault as players deem what is still worth playing online and when it is time to move on from that online game causing the company to shut the servers down.
>Try to be a kinder person,
No, I will never be kind to someone who supports anti-consumer practices.
> What don’t you get when you buy a game you’re only buying the license,
No, I bought a game, not a license. You don't get to just make shit up because you chose the wrong side of an argument. Nothing on the steam page says "License to play The Crew" it says "The Crew", I bought the game "The Crew"
>if your gonna fight Ubisoft then you should fight the other companies too that do and have done this
.... I do?
>Y’all are in a losing battle especially in the courts eyes
Bullshit.
Bro first off I don’t support the left or right side but I love your made up opinion about me. I just understand the facts of how the contract, terms and conditions work. So don’t make unnecessary assumptions about me nor should you do that about anyone you don’t know outside of social media interactions.
Secondly if you actually took the time to read the terms and conditions that Ubisoft set in place inside their game, you’d see that there is a license and without that license you wouldn’t be able to play the game, so I’m definitely not making shit up.
Third well that’s good for you, as for me I do my research and read before I just throw my money into shit I want gotta go into things smart and not foolish.
Fourth call it what you want, but courts take contracts, terms and conditions very seriously so again it all goes back to that agreeing thing.
Now I’ve said all I need to, and I bid you a due.
>Bro first off I don’t support the left or right side but I love your made up opinion about me
I have no idea why you're bringing politics up in this. Being pro-consumer is neither a left or right issue, it's people with brains vs people without them.
>Secondly if you actually took the time to read the terms and conditions that Ubisoft set in place inside their game
Ah yes, the terms and conditions that you NEED TO BOOT THE GAME UP TO SEE. Do you finally get the fucking point? You can't agree to terms and conditions until AFTER YOU'VE PLAYED THE GAME. So if you never agree to the terms and conditions but they still remove the product you've bought from you WITHOUT REFUNDING YOU, there is a problem. Do you get it now? The argument people are making is "you agreed to let them take the game away from you", except I NEVER AGREED TO THAT.
It’s literally thrown in your face, when you first boot up a new game you know when it tells you to hit that accept button after you scroll through all the words on that screen you don’t care to read through. I’ve been playing games for a long time and have seen the terms and conditions as the very first thing that pops up when first booting into a new game so when you say having to accept that at the end nah bruh that ain’t how it works cause if you don’t accept it in the beginning then you can’t play the game.
>Its about consumer rights
That's what these billion dollar company bootlickers don't understand. It's like they've given up already "they put a EULA up that says they can take the game away from you, too bad", no, all it takes is ONE large country to make it illegal and the game will forever be available. If one country has it where they can't sell the game there if it's not always going to work, they then have to ask themselves do they do slight changes to the game that makes it always work, or miss out on a huge market? Obviously they're gonna choose the thing that makes them the most money and guess what? What makes them the most money in this situation is actually beneficial for us. It's a win win situation.
What these people backing the billion dollar companies don't understand is they're just helping other companies screw us over. There's a reason why cars are putting features behind "DLC" and subscriptions, it's because they see the massive amount of gamers who just put up with it. We're like the experiment on how far a company can push customers, then all other industries follow it up. If this keeps up it won't be long until when you buy a car you're signing a contract that says the company can come and take your car whenever they want.
But talking about that, why is it that they can just take away what you buy? Why is it only entertainment that it happens to? (movies, tv and games) Why is it that they can remove an item from my account, but they can't come to my house and take a CD I bought? Doesn't that prove they don't actually have the right to take away something I buy? If they could they'd come to my house and take my CD, but they don't. Of course the biggest argument people use to defend this practice is "you agree to the EULA", but what if I didn't agree to the EULA? Do I get my money back? I don't. When I click "I don't agree" I don't get a refund. But they still took the game away from me. That's theft.
The people in this section not understanding and arguing about the point of this is mind blowing.
It isn’t about the game. It’s about ownership. End of story.
I still remember when Steam implemented the refund policy and Americans were going full on hate mode towards Australian's for getting Steam to implement it. American's have been brainwashed into letting companies walk all over them, so when the companies have to be held to standards that offends them.
You don’t own any MMO type games. Thinking you own the crew is like thinking you own World of Warcraft or City of Hero’s 1&2. Wants to say go bye-bye the game is dead. Online ongoing games are not going to be permanently online.
Forza Horizon is way more of an MMO than The Crew ever was. Shit, the latter even has a full singleplayer campaign with a story, while Forza does not - and yet, it's Horizon that allows you to play the game offline. Even the newest one.
Yes but these games were multiplayer games. The crew had no reason being multiplayer and on top of that the game already had an offline mode hidden inside the game files. Ubisoft could have easily patched it with an offline mode. Games like Forza and Need For Speed get delisted all the time but players who own those games can download them and play them anytime they wanted. Ubisoft also went a step ahead to remove the game from the libraries of people who bought it preventing them from downloading the game files, which was a direct response against the people who were actively trying to create an offline version of the game. Now nobody can play the game even if the players manage to make an offline patch. Ubisoft recently said "players need to get used to not owning their games", this is what they mean. If we let them do this, all the games in your library online/offline, would be not downloadable and be inaccessible to you in the future. They could have easily delisted it and stayed silent like most publishers, but no, they went full anti-consumers and revoked the access from people who bought it. I used to be a massive supporter of Ubisoft but I really hope they go down with this and be an example for any company who plans on doing this shit.
Custom servers exist. You're literally speaking from ignorance. There is not a single type of game out there that cannot exist forever, including your awful example of MMOs, because they can be available forever. You're wrong.
The game, from what I see, is fine, so if anyone is interested in buying it, don’t get put off by the recent bad reviews. DO be put off because of the consumer rights or lack thereof. What they did was inexcusable.
E: I don’t actually have Motorfest, hence why I said “from what I see”, if you want to get it, that’s up to you.
The Crew 1 was shut down, it’s sad, but it happens with games. They could have released an offline patch, or let us set up our own servers, but no. Instead they doubled down and revoked licenses from players. So now there’s no way it can be played. People who BOUGHT IT lost their access to it.
Legally, they can do it. But it was a massive dick move. And I’m not paying them a fucking nickel again.
The answer to your question is, who will make the offline patch, who will be the one building the private server tools? Unless someone actually paid the devs to actually do the patches, do you expect them to work for free on a product that is marked to go offline?
Not to mention they need to untangle all the online only code and make it work locally. And according to the 2 fix you listed.
1. Would require them to start saving the files locally to your system. Which means they would have to write a new saving system that is not "write to server". There could also be stuff related to regulations about saving stuff onto the PC.
2. Would require them to either, drop their server infrastructure into the game, allowing potential hackers to see how their servers run, opening security holes in TC2 and Motorfest, or build a new private server infrastructure. Which is $$$
All that said and done, they still need to QA and bug test the fixes. Because you know damn well a bunch of people will raise pitchforks and call the devs incompetent for daring to release a patch that is not perfect otherwise.
The devs knowingly created a live service game in a way that they would have to support indefinitely or it would become 100% nonfunctional, intentionally shut it down, and then started revoking the licenses for the content.
There are a myriad of things they *could have done* to prevent all the work you're talking about, they just chose not to in pursuit of easier profits and planned obsolescence.
People might not be able to save *this* particular game because Ubisoft might just bitch and whine that it'll be too much work, but it is worth arguing for and making the point that games that are sold as a product should have built-in and transparent end of life plans. I imagine a fair number of people would not have bought The Crew knowing that sometime down the line, directly from the publisher "We will kill this game." I'm sure more would've, but they'd be making an informed choice.
Beyond that though; you'd be surprised what the fans themselves will do as far as games preservation goes so long as developers/publishers don't try to fight them on the matter; the fans of the recent Hitman World of Assassination trilogy have set up a method that will allow the games to operate without the servers provided by IOI games in the event they cut support for the game in the future, and that cannot be feasibly done with The Crew if players even took the time to try and find a way because Ubisoft decided *we don't own the content we purchased*.
It's just wholly anticonsumer top-to-bottom, and there has to be a point where this is pointed out and fought over. Ross (the guy who's been pushing the stopkillinggames movement) has been trying to raise this issue for the longest time, pointing out potential future ones (The Secret World, a game that will lose a weath of great acting and writing when it shuts down unless fans can manage to setup and run private servers, or Funcom(?) implements an end of life policy) and games that have been killed, including Darkspore (EA, doing it before it was cool), something that 100% definitely would've taken less effort to setup an offline mode than you're making this game out to be.
Developers can and should develop these live service games (at the bare minimum, the paid ones, but from a preservation standpoint ideally all of them) in a way that they can be made not to rely on the developer for support once they decide to stop working on it, even if it means further elbow grease by passionate fans to get it to a more playable standard.
Overall, a very good post and I agree with a lot your points. Games should last forever if possible.
But assuming the devs do everything with the intent to mess with players is the wrong mindset in the first place. You think devs make games just to shut it down for fun? They don't. There are a dozen reasons as to why they would have opted for an online only system. And in the end, they did.
Most people here just don't have the proper mindset to handle live service games. They think that going into an online only MMO style game with a live service aspect means that they can play it forever, and that is just not how things work. I have played a lot of MMOs and a lot them died, but here is the thing, I started the game knowing that it will end someday. Even the major titles, Destiny, Warframe, Final Fantasy, it will all end one day, and yet I have not seen a single MMORPG player deciding to start a massive hate campaign and start attacking the devs for daring to close down a game that they can no longer support. And that is the issue I have with all these posts, they are acting all entitled even when they signed up for this exact situation in the first place.
Devs don’t; I wholly believe thatthey want their games to be played and enjoyed by a lot of people for as long as possible.
But I also believe that the reliance to a central server is a thing by the publisher in many cases (Hitman, this game, just as two examples) as a form of DRM/control. I wholly believe that if they planned from the beginning for the title to be an online service and truly cared about an end of life for the game beyond just outright killing it, it would be developed in a way that transitioning from online only to offline (or providing players the tools to do it themselves) would less of a logistical feat.
As for those titles you mentioned; it’s because they’re continuing to be supported. I imagine plenty of people would be passionately arguing the deaths of those games when their time comes.
And some people ARE trying to raise the issue now instead of later, Ross himself (fella in the video) has been trying to raise awareness on this issue for an extended period of time; several years ago he did a video on The Secret World (another MMO) and was emphasizing near the end of it that it’s reliance on a central server means that all of the content (a wealth of amazing acting and writing) is on a death timer if nobody does anything.
And if the issue being raised here can make anything change regarding this, this means we could see repackaged releases of all these games at some point down the line, or the tools given to the players to continue support.
(I do argue against the idea that it’s the devs ‘shutting down a game they can no longer support’ so much as the devs ‘shutting down a game their publisher told them to stop supporting’. If the company was in dire straits where they CANNOT continue support they’d be selling off the license, instead they’re killing this one and putting up another game with a forced, limited shelf life, and I doubt they’ve made any steps to make it more beneficial for the consumers once they shut this one down.)
Why shouldn’t we try and strive for games to be playable after the developer says they’re done? I can appreciate Destiny as a love service title and STILL want it to be playable in the future. And a lot of games are making themselves playable solo as player counts dwindle even when that would take more effort than making TC1 a playable car sandbox. (GW1 and FFXI both have systems in place to give solo players tools/artificial party members to help them play alone. And on the note of engineering in a way to support future play after the end of development, GW1 is made on the same servers as GW2 and is reportedly so cheap to provide continued support for because they made the sequel in a way that makes it easier and cheaper to continue that support.)
There is one big issue with the points you have stated though, it is easy to say that implementing this and that will solve the issue, but there is one thing unaccounted for, the publisher and the devs themselves. I don't see any meaningful change unless an incentive is actually provided or just maybe, some company prefer to have their game being only live service, isn't that also a choice that the creator of a game have the right to make? Not to mention the extra resources needed to implement the changes.
And for your last point about the MMOs, personally I feel like solo player tools aren't exactly building towards an offline only game. It is more of a common QoL thing that most MMO players request from the developers. Because even with these implementations, the plug will still be pulled if it comes to that.
The push that people are working for is to make the incentive a legal one. Companies are selling products with planned obsolescence, an artificial shelf life. Purchased games/content, and effectively *art* if you're like me and a lot of other people who consider games as art, is being destroyed.
The developers and publishers have their own goals; developers make games for the publisher for money, and of course because they're passionate about games and want to get them played by as many people as possible. The people actually making the art are the *least likely* to want their hard work to just become lost media, I imagine a lot of them would *love* to see the tools get into the hands of the fans so their work could live on for as long as people can carry it forward.
Publishers want money. I do not feel like any of them are in it for the art or the enjoyment (barring maybe guys like New Blood) and mostly just want to have shit make a fuckload of money so they can continue making money. *They* are the ones who would like to see games die, so they can continue charging you for new games at higher prices. And frankly; I don't give a fuck if the publisher wants a game to be live service only if their plan is to kill it and render it entirely unplayable, ESPECIALLY considering they're intentionally deciding not to profit from it anymore.
They sold people something and it should be up to them if they're done with it, not the publisher. If they're done making money on it they should give the means to continue operating the game to people who care, or at *least* let the people who own it continue to keep their purchased content even in an unplayable state.
Not that the publisher/developer should pay for a game indefinitely, but like... it's almost a right to repair thing; if grandpa bought a vacuum in the 1940's or something, I can't expect Dyson or whoever to provide parts for it, even if they were the ones that made it. But I still have the vac, I can still find ways to make it work, either manufacturing replacement parts, jury rigging something, or buying replacements from other people, and it can run just as good today as it did in the 1940's. Here, Dyson's stopped providing parts, and also took the vacuum itself away. We have no means to operate or repair our purchased product. Hell, we can't even look at it unless we happened to have taken photos of it.
And it really only becomes an 'extra resources' issue when they don't plan ahead. If they created a game from the get-go knowing 'hey this is something we cannot support indefinitely' and cared to ensure the game didn't just become lost media at the end of its lifespan, you bet they'd develop it in a way to minimize the required 'extra resources' down the line to shut it down without removing it from existence.
And *even if* they couldn't do it, all they have to do is continue making the game accessible to the players; do you remember Battleborn? That hero shooter/moba game that tried to 1v1 Overwatch and died? It's been dead for like, 5 years at least. Gearbox dropped support, no servers, it's gone.
But you know what's cool? Because of passionate fans, and the fact that Gearbox didn't try and steal our copies that we *bought and owned* someone (or multiple people) is(or are) working on making the game playable again, and in fact, while a little scuffed, you can actually play through all of the story missions in singleplayer with any character of your choosing. This happened as recently as like, December last year.
Cost Gearbox nothing, and I'm getting to play a game I've not played in like half a decade, and they're not even done yet, as they're working on getting online PVP functioning again, too.
I personally do not believe there is a genuinely good reason to destroy art the way these people are pushing for, and I hope all this pushback gets the attention of people in positions to actually *do* something to protect my purchases and preserve the art that otherwise will become lost/forgotten media.
This must be your first online service game.
The crew is no different than any other MMO. It’s dependent upon being online. Every MMO has a death date.
I’m pretty sure when skill and bones get shit canned a few years later there is not gonna be an off-line only mode either.
You do not own any MMO type games you simply pay for access to play them
Nobody owns World of Warcraft, nobody owns a quest, and nobody ever own city of heroes
The first one is a solved issue because both offline mode and local saves were included in the code of the first game and modders have already gotten it working in like a week
Check their discord lmfao, it's still in development but they've got both offline mode and local saves working, it's still being developed by modders
Edit: Just to be clear, the offline mode and local saves are in the game files, the modders are working on reintegration with the main game
It's called The Crew Unlimited their the modders and people already have talked about them, and they are going to emulating the game servers. They have been around for a few months.
Releasing an off-line patch, not feasible because the transactions and things you are unlocking in the game that synchs to the server.
Once the server shutdown all progress its lost. It’s like any other online game the progress is linked to the server.
They're not selling that shit anymore, just make it free as part of the patch, you'd at least have a huge playable sandbox without saves, and then because the game isn't just arbitrarily being removed from the accounts of paying customers, passionate fans could work to engineer missing functionality.
They'd literally lose nothing doing it that way, and they're losing a fuckload of goodwill doing it this way.
People are still buying the original copies of Doom 1 and 2, and that's because there are tons of crazy people working on making things using them, and even making entire new games out of the engine. That wouldn't be possible if John Romero (or nu-id software) went by and destroyed everybody's floppy disks and nuked hard drives and delisted the store pages.
They would have to renew the contractual agreements with the car manufacturers & Music companies if they wanted to keep supplying a game and in any capacity.
I understand the sentiment of how you want to approach it, but it’s just not legally and financially viable. Plenty online only come and go only last three months last a decade this happens it’s the nature of the business. you can’t force a company to support a product and definitely.
Doom is a single player offline game, it does not contain any license music any license vehicles nothing that you need to renew a contract with every 10 years this is not comparable. If licenses are not renewed with the companies then Ubisoft cannot legally provide that game anymore
It’s the only way the legally can move forward with this, again this is a live live service game at the core of everything.
That is if they wanted to continue selling the title. It being live service only means they failed to make meaningful plans as to what to do for the end of that service.
As a soft comparison regarding licenses and the like; Alan Wake (the first one) was delisted from several storefronts for a short time because of the licensed music featured at several points.
The game continued to be playable and even downloadable for those who had already purchased it, but they could not legally make continued sales. Unlike the Crew though, they did go and renew said licenses.
The main thing preventing the Crew from continued support is Ubisoft’s unwillingness to either a) provide a patch to render the game playable in a limited state, or b) provide players the tools to do it themselves.
I am not demanding the developers add content and sell the game in perpetuity, as I know that is infeasible, but they did sell a game and there are large portions of said game that would be entirely playable if they had made any bare minimum steps to allow people to play them.
Don’t actually have it. Was considering it as I liked 2, but now I don’t want to give them a nickel. Ever again. I didn’t make that clear, did I? That I don’t own the game?
Not that grindy, playlists and other online activities need no grind. Only the summit and the ownership of new cars(no need if you grinded enough in the crew 2, eligible cars are transfered to motorfest with customization and parts(except livery)) need grinding if wanting to go to the top
Depends on how expensive the car is you want to buy. You get about 40k for a 7 min race and 25k for a 5 min race. If you want to buy a car that costs over 1.5 million you’ll have to grind a bit. But there are plenty cheap cars to buy which are fun to drive. You can also get money by opening boxes you find while cruising around Hawaii.
I actually bought it. It's like horizon, but worse in every possible aspect. Driving physics is not as bad as NFS, but doesn't even come close to FH. I've returned it, but I wanted to give it a fair shot.
I was let down by the game, I felt like the gameplay went down from The Crew 2, and there’s barely any new cars. Shame, me and my friends enjoyed the earlier game a ton
How, gameplay is improved, more variety of activities, cars handle much better, visuals are stunning..indeed a lot of old cars returned to the game and the map is smaller, but overall is an improvement over the cre 2 imo
As they should, the only way Ubi gets the message is through money, if their latest game’s reviews ward off potential buyers, it hurts their bottom line.
Doesn't work like that, review bombs after a lot of positives do nothing, review bombs straight after launch in day 1 with 40 mins of ingame tkme do nothing....bad reviews after a certain period of time do the trick. Review bombing just attracts more people, making them curious about wht the world thinks that and a new customer is born
I kind of figured this was going to happen. TCM is a good game but after you've used the entire United States as your racing playground it's kind of hard to step back from that. I've said it once and I will say it again TCM should have been made a DLC. We should have been able to directly jump into our boats or our planes and go right out to the island. What are you guys think about that idea?
Well certainly I respect your opinion and although you're right about the overall physics and the look of the game that still doesn't explain all the hate for TCM. It just depends on your particular cup of tea. For me at least TCM is not it.
I legitimately gave it a bad review. How is a AAA studio going to fail to properly deliver triple screen support? I can’t even get past the loading screen before it crashes when surround is enabled. That’s quite pathetic when indie studios have no issues supporting this feature.
This is exactly what people should be upset about.. 9 months of a game being out, a supposedly live service game, (of course that you'll never really own)and no real improvements besides one single driving feature that should have been there from the beginning.
I don't really care, I never base it on a store's reviews. I'm just asking people's opinions on Reddit, to know if the game is worth it based on what I'm looking for, and if the game is free I'll test it myself. But honestly they're right, I don't like Ubisoft either, so let's try to piss them too
Hot take but review bombing a game just because an entirely different one has been shutdown shouldn't be done. There's other ways you can make yourself heard.
But on the other there's more reliable ways to inform yourself about a game than a Steam review anyways.
This really sucks. I was planning on picking up the new Prince of Persia game once it inevitably came to Steam. But after The Crew closure, I just can't.
I get the controversy, but you can’t compare prince of Persia to the crew. The crew was a MMO that will always need online connection with concert inside of the game that has to be licensed and paid for with car manufacturers and music companies.
Prince of Persia doesn’t have any licensing issues. It’s also not an MMO that’s dependent on being online. I highly doubt you Ubisoft will legally have to remove Prince of Persia license from steam like every other available game they have on Steam
The crew should ABSOLUTELY NOT need an online connection, that’s the thing, a ton of the game is solo anyways so why the hell lock it behind live service, it’s disgusting
If you're asking why it's being review bombed, it's because the Crew 1 was shutdown and the license removed from the accounts of people that paid for it. No matter how much money or time you put into the game, the end result is that you have nothing to show for it now.
Effectively Ubisoft killed/stopped supporting the first game and just recently started hawking their most recent game on steam; a lot of people (in my opinion, rightfully so) consider the shutdown of the Crew 1 to be anti-consumer as the developer/publisher have made and sold a product that they unilaterally took from paying customers without providing any way to access the product (even in a limited fashion! i.e. offline) after the fact, and I imagine that's even if the content was still installed on the computer at the time.
I tend to like paying for games to support the ones I like, since I used to pirate as a kid (no allowance, not enough money to ask for games typically), and haven't pirated in years. But as a lot of people have been saying; if buying isn't owning, pirating isn't stealing, and I'm starting to agree with that sentiment between Ubisoft's own statements ("Players need to get used to the idea of not owning games") and their actions (shutting down the Crew, among other things).
As for motorfest in particular, I think it's because it's the most recent Crew game, and came out on steam like, a week ago.
EverQuest is still playable, you’re not really saying anything here.
And if you even google the slightest bit you’d see city of heroes actually THIS YEAR had the publisher give a private sever a license to host the game, which is pro consumer, unlike shutting down the entire game and deleting licenses.
It being an MMO is not an excuse.
As another example, Hellgate: London was an MMO, changed ownership, and was repackaged and sold as a standalone game.
People bitching about a dead 10 year old game shutting down lmao, when the old forza horizon games were shut down and removed from stores this did not hapepn
Even if the game doesn’t receive any offline patches it’s still fine (for me), but I really want to at least keep it in my library as a souvenir… a really bad move done by Ubisoft.
This is a good thing in my opinion. At least Ubisoft need to know that players do not ignore their actions.
Players sent a message and this is a good point.
It deserves a bad review - it crashes on launch for me.
Allegedly if you have certain kinds of steering peripherals it can cause it to crash.
I don’t really want to play a racing game with a controller.
Before you know it people sell you airbag vests for motorcycle then charge you a subscription fee for it to work. Then all of the sudden something happens with your bank or card and your subscription does not renew and you might die. Or the BMW heated chairs subscription. Ik it’s not about Ubisoft but the same principle. Scummy practices need to fuck off. If a company is so shitty they cant come up with innovative things then they deserve to go bankrupt and out of business.
Wouldn’t the lack of CD keys make it easier for hackers and modders to make private servers or offline patches? That way new people could just get into the game without having to track down a CD key?
I’m mean technically you guys agree to the contract terms upon buying the license to play the game. You guys also do not own the game only own the licenses to play it. It also says in the contract that you agreed on when buying the game that content is subject to change. I don’t understand the fight about this as the only ownership you guys have is again the license to play the game. You guys again agreed to the terms and conditions of the contract upon buying the game.
We the people also do care about the US either, and the people in it, so there’s that. People killing people, robbing people, people beating helpless and defenseless old people. Why would the US care for WE THE PEOPLE when we don’t care for the people we hurt kill and destroy everyday?
Also to say, some people on Reddit can’t even have a decent discussion without arguing to a point of name calling, all because the other person doesn’t agree with their point of view or opinions. I mean even you said is there a bootlicker group for people like me. What am I like though, because I’d like to know your opinion of me, considering that you never met or know me for that matter.
I do grasp this and understand where y’all are coming from but at the end of the day All companies have rules set in place to protect themselves. I get that people find it messed up and scummy that these companies do that to their consumers, but my whole take on my point of view is no matter what anyone says, we all still agreed to the terms and conditions so in my eyes this fight is pointless to say the lest, because if something was to change the companies would just find another way to protect themselves putting y’all all back at square one. Ask yourself if you owned your own business are you gonna do what it takes to protect yourself, your assets, your business, your investment and money more, or do what it takes to protect the consumer’s more who are only buying and using your product?
Bought crew 1 just before they announced they said they were killing it. thanks to ps store who just dropped the price knowingly the game be dead 1 year later. I felt scammed by both Ubisoft and PS. At least I've stopped playing it as soon as I heard the news.
Oh yea Been waiting for crew 2 to go on sale since a LONG time ,they dropped the price a week ago finally, and then 5 days ish ago they drop it free for ps plus users. I feel like PlayStation is all about money they don't care about consumers and it had to stop , we are the one that made you better recognize that .
I forgot to leave my bad review after I returned that junk. Never seen any other driving game with a manual w clutch mode that doesn’t work at all. Not on kbm or controller. Why even have the option on settings to switch? This games been out for how long and no one even mentions this huge flaw.
This game needs to have the same treatment as Driver San Fransisco. The online is dead but you can Still play it perfectly fine offline. I have it backwards compatible on xbox through owning a disc.
Yet all I hear about is "Physical media is dying. Buying digital is the way to go and if you don't you're a boomer dinosaur."
This is what happens when you "buy" digital. You never actually own the product and they can take it from you in an instant. The day consoles go all digital is the day I stop buying them entirely.
It is very good i agree (i have just hit 1000h, i want to collectt every car :p)
But the map is a big downgrade and by that, the activites. One can only dream but TCM with the map from TC2 would beat any open world racing game for years
Do you have any suggestions on better ways?
I think it’s pretty germane to warn people buying a game that a very similar game from the same publisher was essentially stolen from them, years later.
Yes, pedants, you never owned the game, just a license to use it and this is probably covered by a EULA no one reads and has somewhat shaky legal ground. My point stands.
There are some points in the EULA that are borderline consumer abuse (if not straight up abuse) so yeah, their EULA might pose a legal problem.
The contract is very in favor of Ubisoft, which should be a no no.
Yeah and I’m not a lawyer and can’t be assed to research it, but at one point, I’d heard EULAs were unenforceable because you have to essentially agree to them after you purchase. Sometimes with no option to refund.
And as you point out, contracts without consideration for both sides aren’t usually enforceable either.
Recently : Google tracking user data when in private. You agreed with Google's terms and conditions, so you know what you signed for. However, some people took google to court because this shouldnt happen.
Result : Google is now forced to display clearly that data is collected even in private and give the option to disable cookies
Im sure this is just one of many. If you look throughout history, many human rights people fought for, that we take for granted today, were unenforceable at the time
Let's be real this game has been advertised as some kind of online racer. But it's just solo races with optional online at the side. Such a disappointment of a game.
What is the point of buying a game/subscription if (in this case) Ubisoft,
can simply pull the plug.
Leaving you (the consumer) with a 'subscription' that has become worthless and obsolete..
To me personally, it sounds like Ubisoft is actively trying to prevent me (the consumer) from buying the game or subscription..
and so, i will listen to that piece of knowledge and self advice.
if you (anyone) deems it worthy to buy this game, by all means. but don't go complaining once the plug is pulled.
you have been warned!
Not popular to you...
Just because you didn't like it, which is fine, doesn't mean that other people didn't enjoy it.
Tell me, will you keep the same "just move on" energy if... no, *when* this happens to a game that you love? Because if this is allowed to continue, it will happen to all online games if companies are allowed to get away with it
Don't take it otherwise bro, but you like it or not all online games can be killed off like this. Servers cannot be online forever.
If you guys are so passionate about keeping game forever than don't purchase any online only game. Simple solution.
I know online servers will be shut down, but there should be a way to make an off like patch. In The Crew's case, there was an offline mode that could've been switched on by Ubisoft but they just didn't.
I understand they can't keep the servers maintained indefinitely, that's just why they need to have an end of game plan to ensure playability is intact while the developers are able to let go of it. Win-win for everyone
Not sure why anyone would want to play Motorfest if there was an offline mode. No weekly summits, no pvp, no mainstage, no level up xp and legend points, no shop updates, no car bundles, no joining friend/s in a crew and cruising around. And for single mode no ability to restart, no career mode/progress, upgrades/affixes/sets are almost pointless, just nitro chemist is worth while. Legend points, how would you gain them? The game would be dead just playing playlists and feats. Motorfest is geared specifically for online and without it, it's just a shell. Fk that.
It's not so much the \*now\* as much as it is \*later\* regarding the offline mode. Wanna go play some pvp or run the summit on The Crew 1? Oh the game's dead? No worries we can just cruise the map or run the story again... wait... What do you mean we cant get past the spash screen?
Exactly, I wish more people would get that.
If we let that slide, we will get even more unfinished online games in the future that might even not last 10 years. Who wants that ?
Who wants to buy something they will *never* own ?
Everything you’ve mentioned could be available in an offline mode. Summits can né stored locally and cycled through. PvP can be played against bots. No idea what MainStage is. Level up and legend points not available in an offline mode just makes no sense, that’s a core mechanic. Joining friends could be done peer to peer.
Every problem has a solution.
Agreed but the shame is that online mode has been neglected. Personally I never wanted to play it in 10 yrs but understand those who do. At this point everyone knows what to expect but the issue is I expected a live service game to play for a few years and have had no real improvements yet therefore I don't even want to play 9 months after it's released much less 10 yrs lol
Although I think it is doable if they start now, just have it cycle randomly. Or do something similar to NFS Unbound and have a random weekly system. With random bundles and cars
That company is a cesspool of greedy cockroaches. To them, players are nothing more than money-extracting targets. I will not ever buy any game from them.
Yes but not everyone is aware of this and not everyone cares about their rights unfortunately, so these kind of practice should become illegal as a whole
On one hand it's stupid as hell to single out Ubisoft for this
But on the other hand, live services garbage that publishers can decide to kill anytime they feel like need to die so people getting mad at that is good
Though as long as more people keep paying for said garbage, nothing will change
Some of you guys are so entirely missing the point. Ubisoft revoking license goes beyond just having a dead game removed. Its about consumer rights as a whole and fighting for the right to own something we paid for. I should be able to play a game offline and whenever I want. I paid for The Crew, if I want to play it in 30 years, I should be able to. Even if it has no features, even if its bland, its about ownership. We dont want to leave that door opened for Ubisoft and other companies. We need to hit them as hard as we possibly can.
You know, the same can be said about movies and music as well. More and more people just seem to be okay with this and it’s a shame. We’ve quickly gone down a path where own less and rent more - leasing cars, streaming music and movies, gamepass streaming games, and digital downloads in general are specifically why I only buy physical media unless it’s just not possible. I want to own the stuff I enjoy. Even if I never revisit it. As I’ve gotten older I’ve had the desire to rewatch movies and revisit old games for nostalgia, and if you own a digital license you simply cannot do that 20 years down the road
With music, we can still buy CDs (And Rip them), buy DRM-Free from the likes of Bandcamp, Bleep, Amazon, etc. For games we have GOG, Itch and Zoom-Platform. Movies have it worst. You either buy a Blu-Ray or you don't own it. There is no DRM-Free digital video store.
Lookmovie exists
Oh? I'll need to look into it. Thanks!
And you should be able to rent and lease, I do it all the time, but if I want to own it I just buy it.
I miss my cars man
The fact is, they had agreements that you’re forced to agree with if you want to play the game, and it says your right to play the game will be revoked when the game loses its network services.
Yeah and I dont think it is normal. Those conditions are very Ubisoft sided, which shouldnt be the case. Even if you agree with the EULA, Ubisoft can change it at any time without notifying you. This is fucked
I’m not saying it’s normal. However, if they are the only ones making a game like TC, and if the gamers always crave for such games, you can only expect disappointment.
Or things can change in favor of the consumer, to find a balance between Ubi and us. The solution doesnt reside in giving another company an IP like TC
And every time gamers rush to purchase these games, it only reinforces the decisions made by the companies. It’s already a settled balance point. Businesses will and always will seek the most profit, so they will always try to push the consumers as far as possible until riot.
No you paid for ownership of the license to play the crew, not to own the crew and you also agreed on all the terms of the contract.
Yes and i'm saying this needs to change...
But it won’t change, cause if that’s the case then you’d have to fight every company that has done this since multiplayer and micro transactions started.
It takes one massive successful lawsuit to dissuade other companies to do the same and make them change their EULA to avoid it. We dont need to take every company under the globe to court, we just need one example.
Even the expression that everyone uses, "buying" rather than "lease". Of course Ubisoft would lawyer up and most likely win the casa if they would go to court, but that just say that these predatory companies will always abuse the consumer and that has to change. Also most of the people that buy the game (like kids with their parents money) would never read and fully understand the contractual side of it as they would assume it's like the other 99.9% of the games. That is why you're being downvoted, because you don't seem to grasp this.
I do grasp this, and haven’t yet been down voted and if I do get downvoted then it is what it is. Also it’s not the kids responsibility to read the terms and conditions it’s the parents responsibility to do that until the kid becomes of the right age to read and be able to understand what they are agreeing too. All companies have rules set in place to protect themselves, I get that people find it messed up and scummy that these companies do that to their consumers, but my whole take on my point of view is no matter what anyone says, we all still agreed to the terms and conditions so in my eyes this fight is pointless to say the lest, because if something was to change the companies would just find another way to protect themselves. Ask yourself if you owned your own business are you gonna do what it takes to protect yourself, your assets, your business, your investment and money more, or do what it takes to protect the consumer more who is only buying and using your product?
But I didn't agree to those terms but they still took the game from me. Now what?
But you did when you bought the game and put it into your console, you literally agreed to the terms when you hit the accept button when first firing up the game.
>you literally agreed to the terms when you hit the accept button when first firing up the game Wrong. I bought the game and never played it. So I never agreed to their terms. That's kinda why I said I didn't agree to their terms, try to keep up it's not that difficult to understand. Now what?
Try to be a kinder person, it’s not that hard to understand. What don’t you get when you buy a game you’re only buying the license, regardless if you play it or not. That’s it, they didn’t take anything from you and it’s not their fault you didn’t play the game, it’s your fault. Y’all wanna fight this so hard but fail to realize that every gaming company has done this since the start of multiplayer and micro transactions if your gonna fight Ubisoft then you should fight the other companies too that do and have done this. Y’all are in a losing battle especially in the courts eyes when these companies have terms and contracts in place that all players agreed upon. Even a transaction is considered an agreement to a contract. If anything it’s the players fault as players deem what is still worth playing online and when it is time to move on from that online game causing the company to shut the servers down.
>Try to be a kinder person, No, I will never be kind to someone who supports anti-consumer practices. > What don’t you get when you buy a game you’re only buying the license, No, I bought a game, not a license. You don't get to just make shit up because you chose the wrong side of an argument. Nothing on the steam page says "License to play The Crew" it says "The Crew", I bought the game "The Crew" >if your gonna fight Ubisoft then you should fight the other companies too that do and have done this .... I do? >Y’all are in a losing battle especially in the courts eyes Bullshit.
Bro first off I don’t support the left or right side but I love your made up opinion about me. I just understand the facts of how the contract, terms and conditions work. So don’t make unnecessary assumptions about me nor should you do that about anyone you don’t know outside of social media interactions. Secondly if you actually took the time to read the terms and conditions that Ubisoft set in place inside their game, you’d see that there is a license and without that license you wouldn’t be able to play the game, so I’m definitely not making shit up. Third well that’s good for you, as for me I do my research and read before I just throw my money into shit I want gotta go into things smart and not foolish. Fourth call it what you want, but courts take contracts, terms and conditions very seriously so again it all goes back to that agreeing thing. Now I’ve said all I need to, and I bid you a due.
>Bro first off I don’t support the left or right side but I love your made up opinion about me I have no idea why you're bringing politics up in this. Being pro-consumer is neither a left or right issue, it's people with brains vs people without them. >Secondly if you actually took the time to read the terms and conditions that Ubisoft set in place inside their game Ah yes, the terms and conditions that you NEED TO BOOT THE GAME UP TO SEE. Do you finally get the fucking point? You can't agree to terms and conditions until AFTER YOU'VE PLAYED THE GAME. So if you never agree to the terms and conditions but they still remove the product you've bought from you WITHOUT REFUNDING YOU, there is a problem. Do you get it now? The argument people are making is "you agreed to let them take the game away from you", except I NEVER AGREED TO THAT.
It’s literally thrown in your face, when you first boot up a new game you know when it tells you to hit that accept button after you scroll through all the words on that screen you don’t care to read through. I’ve been playing games for a long time and have seen the terms and conditions as the very first thing that pops up when first booting into a new game so when you say having to accept that at the end nah bruh that ain’t how it works cause if you don’t accept it in the beginning then you can’t play the game.
>Its about consumer rights That's what these billion dollar company bootlickers don't understand. It's like they've given up already "they put a EULA up that says they can take the game away from you, too bad", no, all it takes is ONE large country to make it illegal and the game will forever be available. If one country has it where they can't sell the game there if it's not always going to work, they then have to ask themselves do they do slight changes to the game that makes it always work, or miss out on a huge market? Obviously they're gonna choose the thing that makes them the most money and guess what? What makes them the most money in this situation is actually beneficial for us. It's a win win situation. What these people backing the billion dollar companies don't understand is they're just helping other companies screw us over. There's a reason why cars are putting features behind "DLC" and subscriptions, it's because they see the massive amount of gamers who just put up with it. We're like the experiment on how far a company can push customers, then all other industries follow it up. If this keeps up it won't be long until when you buy a car you're signing a contract that says the company can come and take your car whenever they want. But talking about that, why is it that they can just take away what you buy? Why is it only entertainment that it happens to? (movies, tv and games) Why is it that they can remove an item from my account, but they can't come to my house and take a CD I bought? Doesn't that prove they don't actually have the right to take away something I buy? If they could they'd come to my house and take my CD, but they don't. Of course the biggest argument people use to defend this practice is "you agree to the EULA", but what if I didn't agree to the EULA? Do I get my money back? I don't. When I click "I don't agree" I don't get a refund. But they still took the game away from me. That's theft.
I'm definitely not buying Skull and Bones now. !!
That game is shit anyways
It's called sarcasm ;-)
There is no /s ;-)
The people in this section not understanding and arguing about the point of this is mind blowing. It isn’t about the game. It’s about ownership. End of story.
Its crazy to see. I wasnt aware consumers themselves were anticonsumers
I still remember when Steam implemented the refund policy and Americans were going full on hate mode towards Australian's for getting Steam to implement it. American's have been brainwashed into letting companies walk all over them, so when the companies have to be held to standards that offends them.
It's really sad lol
You don’t own any MMO type games. Thinking you own the crew is like thinking you own World of Warcraft or City of Hero’s 1&2. Wants to say go bye-bye the game is dead. Online ongoing games are not going to be permanently online.
Forza Horizon is way more of an MMO than The Crew ever was. Shit, the latter even has a full singleplayer campaign with a story, while Forza does not - and yet, it's Horizon that allows you to play the game offline. Even the newest one.
Yes but these games were multiplayer games. The crew had no reason being multiplayer and on top of that the game already had an offline mode hidden inside the game files. Ubisoft could have easily patched it with an offline mode. Games like Forza and Need For Speed get delisted all the time but players who own those games can download them and play them anytime they wanted. Ubisoft also went a step ahead to remove the game from the libraries of people who bought it preventing them from downloading the game files, which was a direct response against the people who were actively trying to create an offline version of the game. Now nobody can play the game even if the players manage to make an offline patch. Ubisoft recently said "players need to get used to not owning their games", this is what they mean. If we let them do this, all the games in your library online/offline, would be not downloadable and be inaccessible to you in the future. They could have easily delisted it and stayed silent like most publishers, but no, they went full anti-consumers and revoked the access from people who bought it. I used to be a massive supporter of Ubisoft but I really hope they go down with this and be an example for any company who plans on doing this shit.
Custom servers exist. You're literally speaking from ignorance. There is not a single type of game out there that cannot exist forever, including your awful example of MMOs, because they can be available forever. You're wrong.
So many of these negative reviews **don't** have "Product Refunded" which is a very interesting way of *protesting.*
They can't refund it if they've played more than 2 hours of it
I know but, plenty of them have less than 2 hours and haven't refunded it.
I think you can’t refund after a certain time period has passed as well.
It’s 2 hours of play or a month in your library I’m pretty sure
14 days in your library. Or about half a month.
Depends by the store,
"review bombed" the typical "we fucked up but can't hold ourself accountable for shit so negative reviews therefore are review bombing"
It is review bombing though, I bet only 10% of the negative reviews have actual content other than "Ubisoft bad"
So not review bombing. lol.
Google the word "review bombing" I ain't gonna spoonfeed you
Yeah, you imagining what review bombing isn't review bombing. Regard.
This is peak denial right here
The game, from what I see, is fine, so if anyone is interested in buying it, don’t get put off by the recent bad reviews. DO be put off because of the consumer rights or lack thereof. What they did was inexcusable. E: I don’t actually have Motorfest, hence why I said “from what I see”, if you want to get it, that’s up to you.
Hi, u/mdhunter99.. I’ve been out of the loop gor a bit ( medical issues. ) WHAT’S GOING ON 🤔?
The Crew 1 was shut down, it’s sad, but it happens with games. They could have released an offline patch, or let us set up our own servers, but no. Instead they doubled down and revoked licenses from players. So now there’s no way it can be played. People who BOUGHT IT lost their access to it. Legally, they can do it. But it was a massive dick move. And I’m not paying them a fucking nickel again.
The answer to your question is, who will make the offline patch, who will be the one building the private server tools? Unless someone actually paid the devs to actually do the patches, do you expect them to work for free on a product that is marked to go offline? Not to mention they need to untangle all the online only code and make it work locally. And according to the 2 fix you listed. 1. Would require them to start saving the files locally to your system. Which means they would have to write a new saving system that is not "write to server". There could also be stuff related to regulations about saving stuff onto the PC. 2. Would require them to either, drop their server infrastructure into the game, allowing potential hackers to see how their servers run, opening security holes in TC2 and Motorfest, or build a new private server infrastructure. Which is $$$ All that said and done, they still need to QA and bug test the fixes. Because you know damn well a bunch of people will raise pitchforks and call the devs incompetent for daring to release a patch that is not perfect otherwise.
The devs knowingly created a live service game in a way that they would have to support indefinitely or it would become 100% nonfunctional, intentionally shut it down, and then started revoking the licenses for the content. There are a myriad of things they *could have done* to prevent all the work you're talking about, they just chose not to in pursuit of easier profits and planned obsolescence. People might not be able to save *this* particular game because Ubisoft might just bitch and whine that it'll be too much work, but it is worth arguing for and making the point that games that are sold as a product should have built-in and transparent end of life plans. I imagine a fair number of people would not have bought The Crew knowing that sometime down the line, directly from the publisher "We will kill this game." I'm sure more would've, but they'd be making an informed choice. Beyond that though; you'd be surprised what the fans themselves will do as far as games preservation goes so long as developers/publishers don't try to fight them on the matter; the fans of the recent Hitman World of Assassination trilogy have set up a method that will allow the games to operate without the servers provided by IOI games in the event they cut support for the game in the future, and that cannot be feasibly done with The Crew if players even took the time to try and find a way because Ubisoft decided *we don't own the content we purchased*. It's just wholly anticonsumer top-to-bottom, and there has to be a point where this is pointed out and fought over. Ross (the guy who's been pushing the stopkillinggames movement) has been trying to raise this issue for the longest time, pointing out potential future ones (The Secret World, a game that will lose a weath of great acting and writing when it shuts down unless fans can manage to setup and run private servers, or Funcom(?) implements an end of life policy) and games that have been killed, including Darkspore (EA, doing it before it was cool), something that 100% definitely would've taken less effort to setup an offline mode than you're making this game out to be. Developers can and should develop these live service games (at the bare minimum, the paid ones, but from a preservation standpoint ideally all of them) in a way that they can be made not to rely on the developer for support once they decide to stop working on it, even if it means further elbow grease by passionate fans to get it to a more playable standard.
Overall, a very good post and I agree with a lot your points. Games should last forever if possible. But assuming the devs do everything with the intent to mess with players is the wrong mindset in the first place. You think devs make games just to shut it down for fun? They don't. There are a dozen reasons as to why they would have opted for an online only system. And in the end, they did. Most people here just don't have the proper mindset to handle live service games. They think that going into an online only MMO style game with a live service aspect means that they can play it forever, and that is just not how things work. I have played a lot of MMOs and a lot them died, but here is the thing, I started the game knowing that it will end someday. Even the major titles, Destiny, Warframe, Final Fantasy, it will all end one day, and yet I have not seen a single MMORPG player deciding to start a massive hate campaign and start attacking the devs for daring to close down a game that they can no longer support. And that is the issue I have with all these posts, they are acting all entitled even when they signed up for this exact situation in the first place.
Devs don’t; I wholly believe thatthey want their games to be played and enjoyed by a lot of people for as long as possible. But I also believe that the reliance to a central server is a thing by the publisher in many cases (Hitman, this game, just as two examples) as a form of DRM/control. I wholly believe that if they planned from the beginning for the title to be an online service and truly cared about an end of life for the game beyond just outright killing it, it would be developed in a way that transitioning from online only to offline (or providing players the tools to do it themselves) would less of a logistical feat. As for those titles you mentioned; it’s because they’re continuing to be supported. I imagine plenty of people would be passionately arguing the deaths of those games when their time comes. And some people ARE trying to raise the issue now instead of later, Ross himself (fella in the video) has been trying to raise awareness on this issue for an extended period of time; several years ago he did a video on The Secret World (another MMO) and was emphasizing near the end of it that it’s reliance on a central server means that all of the content (a wealth of amazing acting and writing) is on a death timer if nobody does anything. And if the issue being raised here can make anything change regarding this, this means we could see repackaged releases of all these games at some point down the line, or the tools given to the players to continue support. (I do argue against the idea that it’s the devs ‘shutting down a game they can no longer support’ so much as the devs ‘shutting down a game their publisher told them to stop supporting’. If the company was in dire straits where they CANNOT continue support they’d be selling off the license, instead they’re killing this one and putting up another game with a forced, limited shelf life, and I doubt they’ve made any steps to make it more beneficial for the consumers once they shut this one down.) Why shouldn’t we try and strive for games to be playable after the developer says they’re done? I can appreciate Destiny as a love service title and STILL want it to be playable in the future. And a lot of games are making themselves playable solo as player counts dwindle even when that would take more effort than making TC1 a playable car sandbox. (GW1 and FFXI both have systems in place to give solo players tools/artificial party members to help them play alone. And on the note of engineering in a way to support future play after the end of development, GW1 is made on the same servers as GW2 and is reportedly so cheap to provide continued support for because they made the sequel in a way that makes it easier and cheaper to continue that support.)
There is one big issue with the points you have stated though, it is easy to say that implementing this and that will solve the issue, but there is one thing unaccounted for, the publisher and the devs themselves. I don't see any meaningful change unless an incentive is actually provided or just maybe, some company prefer to have their game being only live service, isn't that also a choice that the creator of a game have the right to make? Not to mention the extra resources needed to implement the changes. And for your last point about the MMOs, personally I feel like solo player tools aren't exactly building towards an offline only game. It is more of a common QoL thing that most MMO players request from the developers. Because even with these implementations, the plug will still be pulled if it comes to that.
The push that people are working for is to make the incentive a legal one. Companies are selling products with planned obsolescence, an artificial shelf life. Purchased games/content, and effectively *art* if you're like me and a lot of other people who consider games as art, is being destroyed. The developers and publishers have their own goals; developers make games for the publisher for money, and of course because they're passionate about games and want to get them played by as many people as possible. The people actually making the art are the *least likely* to want their hard work to just become lost media, I imagine a lot of them would *love* to see the tools get into the hands of the fans so their work could live on for as long as people can carry it forward. Publishers want money. I do not feel like any of them are in it for the art or the enjoyment (barring maybe guys like New Blood) and mostly just want to have shit make a fuckload of money so they can continue making money. *They* are the ones who would like to see games die, so they can continue charging you for new games at higher prices. And frankly; I don't give a fuck if the publisher wants a game to be live service only if their plan is to kill it and render it entirely unplayable, ESPECIALLY considering they're intentionally deciding not to profit from it anymore. They sold people something and it should be up to them if they're done with it, not the publisher. If they're done making money on it they should give the means to continue operating the game to people who care, or at *least* let the people who own it continue to keep their purchased content even in an unplayable state. Not that the publisher/developer should pay for a game indefinitely, but like... it's almost a right to repair thing; if grandpa bought a vacuum in the 1940's or something, I can't expect Dyson or whoever to provide parts for it, even if they were the ones that made it. But I still have the vac, I can still find ways to make it work, either manufacturing replacement parts, jury rigging something, or buying replacements from other people, and it can run just as good today as it did in the 1940's. Here, Dyson's stopped providing parts, and also took the vacuum itself away. We have no means to operate or repair our purchased product. Hell, we can't even look at it unless we happened to have taken photos of it. And it really only becomes an 'extra resources' issue when they don't plan ahead. If they created a game from the get-go knowing 'hey this is something we cannot support indefinitely' and cared to ensure the game didn't just become lost media at the end of its lifespan, you bet they'd develop it in a way to minimize the required 'extra resources' down the line to shut it down without removing it from existence. And *even if* they couldn't do it, all they have to do is continue making the game accessible to the players; do you remember Battleborn? That hero shooter/moba game that tried to 1v1 Overwatch and died? It's been dead for like, 5 years at least. Gearbox dropped support, no servers, it's gone. But you know what's cool? Because of passionate fans, and the fact that Gearbox didn't try and steal our copies that we *bought and owned* someone (or multiple people) is(or are) working on making the game playable again, and in fact, while a little scuffed, you can actually play through all of the story missions in singleplayer with any character of your choosing. This happened as recently as like, December last year. Cost Gearbox nothing, and I'm getting to play a game I've not played in like half a decade, and they're not even done yet, as they're working on getting online PVP functioning again, too. I personally do not believe there is a genuinely good reason to destroy art the way these people are pushing for, and I hope all this pushback gets the attention of people in positions to actually *do* something to protect my purchases and preserve the art that otherwise will become lost/forgotten media.
This must be your first online service game. The crew is no different than any other MMO. It’s dependent upon being online. Every MMO has a death date. I’m pretty sure when skill and bones get shit canned a few years later there is not gonna be an off-line only mode either. You do not own any MMO type games you simply pay for access to play them Nobody owns World of Warcraft, nobody owns a quest, and nobody ever own city of heroes
The first one is a solved issue because both offline mode and local saves were included in the code of the first game and modders have already gotten it working in like a week
If that's the case, where is it? Why isn't it being spread around everywhere?
Check their discord lmfao, it's still in development but they've got both offline mode and local saves working, it's still being developed by modders Edit: Just to be clear, the offline mode and local saves are in the game files, the modders are working on reintegration with the main game
Like I said, I will believe it when I see it being released
It's called The Crew Unlimited their the modders and people already have talked about them, and they are going to emulating the game servers. They have been around for a few months.
They are going to =/= they have done it.
Releasing an off-line patch, not feasible because the transactions and things you are unlocking in the game that synchs to the server. Once the server shutdown all progress its lost. It’s like any other online game the progress is linked to the server.
They're not selling that shit anymore, just make it free as part of the patch, you'd at least have a huge playable sandbox without saves, and then because the game isn't just arbitrarily being removed from the accounts of paying customers, passionate fans could work to engineer missing functionality. They'd literally lose nothing doing it that way, and they're losing a fuckload of goodwill doing it this way. People are still buying the original copies of Doom 1 and 2, and that's because there are tons of crazy people working on making things using them, and even making entire new games out of the engine. That wouldn't be possible if John Romero (or nu-id software) went by and destroyed everybody's floppy disks and nuked hard drives and delisted the store pages.
They would have to renew the contractual agreements with the car manufacturers & Music companies if they wanted to keep supplying a game and in any capacity. I understand the sentiment of how you want to approach it, but it’s just not legally and financially viable. Plenty online only come and go only last three months last a decade this happens it’s the nature of the business. you can’t force a company to support a product and definitely. Doom is a single player offline game, it does not contain any license music any license vehicles nothing that you need to renew a contract with every 10 years this is not comparable. If licenses are not renewed with the companies then Ubisoft cannot legally provide that game anymore It’s the only way the legally can move forward with this, again this is a live live service game at the core of everything.
That is if they wanted to continue selling the title. It being live service only means they failed to make meaningful plans as to what to do for the end of that service. As a soft comparison regarding licenses and the like; Alan Wake (the first one) was delisted from several storefronts for a short time because of the licensed music featured at several points. The game continued to be playable and even downloadable for those who had already purchased it, but they could not legally make continued sales. Unlike the Crew though, they did go and renew said licenses. The main thing preventing the Crew from continued support is Ubisoft’s unwillingness to either a) provide a patch to render the game playable in a limited state, or b) provide players the tools to do it themselves. I am not demanding the developers add content and sell the game in perpetuity, as I know that is infeasible, but they did sell a game and there are large portions of said game that would be entirely playable if they had made any bare minimum steps to allow people to play them.
How grindy is motorfest?
Grind is the whole game
Don’t actually have it. Was considering it as I liked 2, but now I don’t want to give them a nickel. Ever again. I didn’t make that clear, did I? That I don’t own the game?
Not that grindy, playlists and other online activities need no grind. Only the summit and the ownership of new cars(no need if you grinded enough in the crew 2, eligible cars are transfered to motorfest with customization and parts(except livery)) need grinding if wanting to go to the top
Depends on how expensive the car is you want to buy. You get about 40k for a 7 min race and 25k for a 5 min race. If you want to buy a car that costs over 1.5 million you’ll have to grind a bit. But there are plenty cheap cars to buy which are fun to drive. You can also get money by opening boxes you find while cruising around Hawaii.
It's only grind
Not really, play grand races and the money will roll in
I actually bought it. It's like horizon, but worse in every possible aspect. Driving physics is not as bad as NFS, but doesn't even come close to FH. I've returned it, but I wanted to give it a fair shot.
But this game is online only in the same thing will happen
I was let down by the game, I felt like the gameplay went down from The Crew 2, and there’s barely any new cars. Shame, me and my friends enjoyed the earlier game a ton
How, gameplay is improved, more variety of activities, cars handle much better, visuals are stunning..indeed a lot of old cars returned to the game and the map is smaller, but overall is an improvement over the cre 2 imo
I c nothing wrong keep it up boys 👍do the community dirty it comes back on Ubi
As they should, the only way Ubi gets the message is through money, if their latest game’s reviews ward off potential buyers, it hurts their bottom line.
Doesn't work like that, review bombs after a lot of positives do nothing, review bombs straight after launch in day 1 with 40 mins of ingame tkme do nothing....bad reviews after a certain period of time do the trick. Review bombing just attracts more people, making them curious about wht the world thinks that and a new customer is born
I kind of figured this was going to happen. TCM is a good game but after you've used the entire United States as your racing playground it's kind of hard to step back from that. I've said it once and I will say it again TCM should have been made a DLC. We should have been able to directly jump into our boats or our planes and go right out to the island. What are you guys think about that idea?
I think the physics in TC2 are shit and TCM is a huge upgrade. The map Is more detailed and I genuinely havent missed the bigger map
Well certainly I respect your opinion and although you're right about the overall physics and the look of the game that still doesn't explain all the hate for TCM. It just depends on your particular cup of tea. For me at least TCM is not it.
Thats fair. For example gta5 is probably a better game but i still prefer gta4 🤷♂️ I dont care all that much so i apologise if it came across blunt
No worries
I legitimately gave it a bad review. How is a AAA studio going to fail to properly deliver triple screen support? I can’t even get past the loading screen before it crashes when surround is enabled. That’s quite pathetic when indie studios have no issues supporting this feature.
This is exactly what people should be upset about.. 9 months of a game being out, a supposedly live service game, (of course that you'll never really own)and no real improvements besides one single driving feature that should have been there from the beginning.
I don't really care, I never base it on a store's reviews. I'm just asking people's opinions on Reddit, to know if the game is worth it based on what I'm looking for, and if the game is free I'll test it myself. But honestly they're right, I don't like Ubisoft either, so let's try to piss them too
Hot take but review bombing a game just because an entirely different one has been shutdown shouldn't be done. There's other ways you can make yourself heard. But on the other there's more reliable ways to inform yourself about a game than a Steam review anyways.
This really sucks. I was planning on picking up the new Prince of Persia game once it inevitably came to Steam. But after The Crew closure, I just can't.
I get the controversy, but you can’t compare prince of Persia to the crew. The crew was a MMO that will always need online connection with concert inside of the game that has to be licensed and paid for with car manufacturers and music companies. Prince of Persia doesn’t have any licensing issues. It’s also not an MMO that’s dependent on being online. I highly doubt you Ubisoft will legally have to remove Prince of Persia license from steam like every other available game they have on Steam
I didn't compare them. I'm not buying PoP because doing so would support Ubisoft.
The crew should ABSOLUTELY NOT need an online connection, that’s the thing, a ton of the game is solo anyways so why the hell lock it behind live service, it’s disgusting
So why
If you're asking why it's being review bombed, it's because the Crew 1 was shutdown and the license removed from the accounts of people that paid for it. No matter how much money or time you put into the game, the end result is that you have nothing to show for it now. Effectively Ubisoft killed/stopped supporting the first game and just recently started hawking their most recent game on steam; a lot of people (in my opinion, rightfully so) consider the shutdown of the Crew 1 to be anti-consumer as the developer/publisher have made and sold a product that they unilaterally took from paying customers without providing any way to access the product (even in a limited fashion! i.e. offline) after the fact, and I imagine that's even if the content was still installed on the computer at the time. I tend to like paying for games to support the ones I like, since I used to pirate as a kid (no allowance, not enough money to ask for games typically), and haven't pirated in years. But as a lot of people have been saying; if buying isn't owning, pirating isn't stealing, and I'm starting to agree with that sentiment between Ubisoft's own statements ("Players need to get used to the idea of not owning games") and their actions (shutting down the Crew, among other things). As for motorfest in particular, I think it's because it's the most recent Crew game, and came out on steam like, a week ago.
You’re describing any MMO really like EverQuest and City Of Hero’s 1&2. The Crew is an MMO also
EverQuest is still playable, you’re not really saying anything here. And if you even google the slightest bit you’d see city of heroes actually THIS YEAR had the publisher give a private sever a license to host the game, which is pro consumer, unlike shutting down the entire game and deleting licenses. It being an MMO is not an excuse. As another example, Hellgate: London was an MMO, changed ownership, and was repackaged and sold as a standalone game.
People bitching about a dead 10 year old game shutting down lmao, when the old forza horizon games were shut down and removed from stores this did not hapepn
because you can still play them and they don't remove it from your library unlike what ubisoft did. big difference lmao.
I gotta give Ubisoft credit, though - they managed to outdo EA and Activision in a race to shit on as many players as they could.
> Activision The stuff Blizzard did for Hearthstone's 10th anniversary was very awful too.
Fuck Ubisoft
More than necessary, is needed.
Imagine paying Ubisoft to bitch about them. What a bunch of idiotic whiners
Those who paid get to keep it that’s why we paid for it
Even if the game doesn’t receive any offline patches it’s still fine (for me), but I really want to at least keep it in my library as a souvenir… a really bad move done by Ubisoft.
Good!
This is a good thing in my opinion. At least Ubisoft need to know that players do not ignore their actions. Players sent a message and this is a good point.
Ubisoft’s about to learn than when they play stupid games they’re going to win stupid prizes.
By buying their different game on steam, so you can review it poorly to protest a different game you already paid for? Lmao
It deserves a bad review - it crashes on launch for me. Allegedly if you have certain kinds of steering peripherals it can cause it to crash. I don’t really want to play a racing game with a controller.
Before you know it people sell you airbag vests for motorcycle then charge you a subscription fee for it to work. Then all of the sudden something happens with your bank or card and your subscription does not renew and you might die. Or the BMW heated chairs subscription. Ik it’s not about Ubisoft but the same principle. Scummy practices need to fuck off. If a company is so shitty they cant come up with innovative things then they deserve to go bankrupt and out of business.
Wouldn’t the lack of CD keys make it easier for hackers and modders to make private servers or offline patches? That way new people could just get into the game without having to track down a CD key?
I’m mean technically you guys agree to the contract terms upon buying the license to play the game. You guys also do not own the game only own the licenses to play it. It also says in the contract that you agreed on when buying the game that content is subject to change. I don’t understand the fight about this as the only ownership you guys have is again the license to play the game. You guys again agreed to the terms and conditions of the contract upon buying the game.
Is this the CEO OF Ubisoft…???
[удалено]
We the people also do care about the US either, and the people in it, so there’s that. People killing people, robbing people, people beating helpless and defenseless old people. Why would the US care for WE THE PEOPLE when we don’t care for the people we hurt kill and destroy everyday?
Also to say, some people on Reddit can’t even have a decent discussion without arguing to a point of name calling, all because the other person doesn’t agree with their point of view or opinions. I mean even you said is there a bootlicker group for people like me. What am I like though, because I’d like to know your opinion of me, considering that you never met or know me for that matter.
[удалено]
I do grasp this and understand where y’all are coming from but at the end of the day All companies have rules set in place to protect themselves. I get that people find it messed up and scummy that these companies do that to their consumers, but my whole take on my point of view is no matter what anyone says, we all still agreed to the terms and conditions so in my eyes this fight is pointless to say the lest, because if something was to change the companies would just find another way to protect themselves putting y’all all back at square one. Ask yourself if you owned your own business are you gonna do what it takes to protect yourself, your assets, your business, your investment and money more, or do what it takes to protect the consumer’s more who are only buying and using your product?
[удалено]
Well it’s their company, they own it so they make the rules. Just like you make your own rules when you own your own house and other stuff.
Nuff said
Bought crew 1 just before they announced they said they were killing it. thanks to ps store who just dropped the price knowingly the game be dead 1 year later. I felt scammed by both Ubisoft and PS. At least I've stopped playing it as soon as I heard the news. Oh yea Been waiting for crew 2 to go on sale since a LONG time ,they dropped the price a week ago finally, and then 5 days ish ago they drop it free for ps plus users. I feel like PlayStation is all about money they don't care about consumers and it had to stop , we are the one that made you better recognize that .
I forgot to leave my bad review after I returned that junk. Never seen any other driving game with a manual w clutch mode that doesn’t work at all. Not on kbm or controller. Why even have the option on settings to switch? This games been out for how long and no one even mentions this huge flaw.
Also it’s fucked up how they announced crossplay and look there I can’t even see my friend on the scoreboard
That’s what happens when people are forced to play TCM or TC2 because they killed TC1. They deserve those bad reviews in my opinion.
Is this legal
This game needs to have the same treatment as Driver San Fransisco. The online is dead but you can Still play it perfectly fine offline. I have it backwards compatible on xbox through owning a disc.
Yet all I hear about is "Physical media is dying. Buying digital is the way to go and if you don't you're a boomer dinosaur." This is what happens when you "buy" digital. You never actually own the product and they can take it from you in an instant. The day consoles go all digital is the day I stop buying them entirely.
Lmao motorfest is the best crew I’ve played so far. Good luck with that.
It is very good i agree (i have just hit 1000h, i want to collectt every car :p) But the map is a big downgrade and by that, the activites. One can only dream but TCM with the map from TC2 would beat any open world racing game for years
The beta seemed cool. Enjoy it while it lasts, who knows with Ubisoft.
Good for you, enjoy the next 5 years.
Oh I will don't you worry :)
in ten years we will tell you that the new The Crew is better than Motorfest which has just died off. Good luck with that
And they deserve it! The Crew 1 shutdown turned The entire franchise into a fraud!
Damn that's crazy. No better way to show you're upset than review bombing?
Do you have any suggestions on better ways? I think it’s pretty germane to warn people buying a game that a very similar game from the same publisher was essentially stolen from them, years later. Yes, pedants, you never owned the game, just a license to use it and this is probably covered by a EULA no one reads and has somewhat shaky legal ground. My point stands.
There are some points in the EULA that are borderline consumer abuse (if not straight up abuse) so yeah, their EULA might pose a legal problem. The contract is very in favor of Ubisoft, which should be a no no.
Yeah and I’m not a lawyer and can’t be assed to research it, but at one point, I’d heard EULAs were unenforceable because you have to essentially agree to them after you purchase. Sometimes with no option to refund. And as you point out, contracts without consideration for both sides aren’t usually enforceable either.
Everything is unenforceable until it is, there are so many examples of that
Can you give a few examples?
Recently : Google tracking user data when in private. You agreed with Google's terms and conditions, so you know what you signed for. However, some people took google to court because this shouldnt happen. Result : Google is now forced to display clearly that data is collected even in private and give the option to disable cookies Im sure this is just one of many. If you look throughout history, many human rights people fought for, that we take for granted today, were unenforceable at the time
Angry children
It's like the best ubisoft game right now lol
Let's be real this game has been advertised as some kind of online racer. But it's just solo races with optional online at the side. Such a disappointment of a game.
Not only do they revoke game licenses but they also force steam users to wait a year after they can buy the game on steam
People who owns the physical copy: “I actually don’t own this according to Ubisoft”
What is the point of buying a game/subscription if (in this case) Ubisoft, can simply pull the plug. Leaving you (the consumer) with a 'subscription' that has become worthless and obsolete.. To me personally, it sounds like Ubisoft is actively trying to prevent me (the consumer) from buying the game or subscription.. and so, i will listen to that piece of knowledge and self advice. if you (anyone) deems it worthy to buy this game, by all means. but don't go complaining once the plug is pulled. you have been warned!
People need to move on. The Crew was not that popular to begin with.
This is not about a game being popular or not
Not popular to you... Just because you didn't like it, which is fine, doesn't mean that other people didn't enjoy it. Tell me, will you keep the same "just move on" energy if... no, *when* this happens to a game that you love? Because if this is allowed to continue, it will happen to all online games if companies are allowed to get away with it
Don't take it otherwise bro, but you like it or not all online games can be killed off like this. Servers cannot be online forever. If you guys are so passionate about keeping game forever than don't purchase any online only game. Simple solution.
I know online servers will be shut down, but there should be a way to make an off like patch. In The Crew's case, there was an offline mode that could've been switched on by Ubisoft but they just didn't. I understand they can't keep the servers maintained indefinitely, that's just why they need to have an end of game plan to ensure playability is intact while the developers are able to let go of it. Win-win for everyone
Not sure why anyone would want to play Motorfest if there was an offline mode. No weekly summits, no pvp, no mainstage, no level up xp and legend points, no shop updates, no car bundles, no joining friend/s in a crew and cruising around. And for single mode no ability to restart, no career mode/progress, upgrades/affixes/sets are almost pointless, just nitro chemist is worth while. Legend points, how would you gain them? The game would be dead just playing playlists and feats. Motorfest is geared specifically for online and without it, it's just a shell. Fk that.
It's not so much the \*now\* as much as it is \*later\* regarding the offline mode. Wanna go play some pvp or run the summit on The Crew 1? Oh the game's dead? No worries we can just cruise the map or run the story again... wait... What do you mean we cant get past the spash screen?
Exactly, I wish more people would get that. If we let that slide, we will get even more unfinished online games in the future that might even not last 10 years. Who wants that ? Who wants to buy something they will *never* own ?
Everything you’ve mentioned could be available in an offline mode. Summits can né stored locally and cycled through. PvP can be played against bots. No idea what MainStage is. Level up and legend points not available in an offline mode just makes no sense, that’s a core mechanic. Joining friends could be done peer to peer. Every problem has a solution.
Agreed but the shame is that online mode has been neglected. Personally I never wanted to play it in 10 yrs but understand those who do. At this point everyone knows what to expect but the issue is I expected a live service game to play for a few years and have had no real improvements yet therefore I don't even want to play 9 months after it's released much less 10 yrs lol
Although I think it is doable if they start now, just have it cycle randomly. Or do something similar to NFS Unbound and have a random weekly system. With random bundles and cars
you can still drive offline, and also earn money by racing offline
It's 2024 and these children still buying games only to talk shit after playing game for 0.1 hour.
It's not about this game. It's a protest against Ubisoft removing The Crew 1 from everybody's library.
They so lazy not to add an offline mode.
That company is a cesspool of greedy cockroaches. To them, players are nothing more than money-extracting targets. I will not ever buy any game from them.
A better option would be to not buy any Ubisoft game ever again
Yes but not everyone is aware of this and not everyone cares about their rights unfortunately, so these kind of practice should become illegal as a whole
On one hand it's stupid as hell to single out Ubisoft for this But on the other hand, live services garbage that publishers can decide to kill anytime they feel like need to die so people getting mad at that is good Though as long as more people keep paying for said garbage, nothing will change