Splinter Cell Conviction Officially Cracked

As title.

Ubisoft's DRM is now officially a giant waste of money. The pirates are getting more adept at cracking this new DRM. AC2 took a month, SC:C took 3 days. Ubisoft needs to know when they're defeated...

 

Pirates; 1
Ubisoft; 0

 

Fixed.
You forgot Silent Hunter and AC2

 

Also the settlers 7 has been cracked which uses this new DRM

 

Moral of the story: If you make it, they will defeat it.

 

Yay! If Ubi doesn't release a patch soon to eliminate the DRM, they are officially the Terd of the Year.

 

Ooh! Maybe I'll pick up SH then.

 

This game runs like crap for me. At 1280x720, with everything either on low or off, I get 20 fps, 25 at most. At 1600x900, with everything set to high I get... the same. Guess Ubisoft didnt spend those 2 extra weeks it took to get the game out for pc optimizing it.

 

I can play it with everything on high and AFx4 (I think, too lazy to check) and get nice smooth frame rates. I have a 5870 and 720qm though.

 

From a Gamespot review:

It is a real shame that so many who are supposedly against this form of DRM still buy the game, because for some reason they think they can't do without it. I will never buy a game that uses this type of DRM and as gamers, we should look at the bigger picture and make sacrifices for a better future. Maybe I could understand if there were no other A++ titles around but there are so many great games that I am overwhelmed.

 

can confirm that all Ubi tittles have now been fully cracked.

Lets see if Ubisoft stick to thier word about releasing a no DRM patch they promised once the games been cracked

 

From IGN's Steve Butts:

Ubisoft needs to step it up.

 

They actually said that? I'm surprised!
That sounds more of a challenge to the pirates than anything lol, bad move Ubi. They were bound to lose this one before it even started. I wonder if this DRM will be removed from future games, but knowing Ubisoft, they'll probably spend another $10 million in developing a new DRM that'll be cracked

 

if i worked in ubisoft, i would suggest holding a contest to everyone to make a successful crack, and winners like skidrow would receive prize of lifetime free games from ubisoft, but once the cracks been leaked, then the lifetime thing would go void.

this would prevent programmers from releasing their cracks to the public.

cracks would be studied to see if it's not a duplication of a same programming source, so only original winners would receive the prize.

then, the DRM would be updated according to the crack.
DRM is back in action, and the contest continues in search of next crack!

official contests such as this would make cracking a educational event, not a crime!

 

part of alot of software training involves reverse engineering, in other words cracking 101 so its already taught to a degree

Alot of the scene groups like skidrow do it for the technical challenge not for the financial reward, offering a financial incentive would not stop these groups doing it. They simply dont do it for money

 

Ubi said they'll remove the DRM if it's completely cracked, hopefully they don't eat their own words

 

Official contests would just reward those who break the TOS and copyright rules.

 

i have no problems with the game to be honest, i dont see what the big deal is, i have both SC-C and the Settlers 7 and both use the ubisoft DRM, so far i have only experienced a pause in game once while playing SP-C its just not really something i think about, i am always connected to the internet when my pc is on, and even when im capped (ie now) i still have no issues with playing either of these games, i can see why people may not like the idea but i think developers are losing a lot of money to pirates and if they have to take extreme measures to try and counter that i don't blame them.......we blame the developers for making things harder for us, instead of looking towards to millions of people that are pirating games....they will be the death of pc gaming not a DRM...

 

Just beat the story mode on Realistic. It was pretty fun. A bit short, but there's plenty of action so you don't get bored.

 

here's another one since the other one isn't visible right now!

 

For Ubisoft, optimizing for PC means developing Draconian DRM You should know this by now!

 

I have a feeling they also do it because they don't believe in DRM and offering money would probably enrage them even more, as it's asking them to be supporters of the DRM.

 

Erm, I don't have the links atm to back this up (and there are tons out there), but there is little correlation between pirating and sales revenue. But there is a huge correlation between DRM and satisfied customers. Bottom line is it hurts the paying customer but not the person pirating the game because they don't have to live with the limitations imposed on them. Do you really believe that sales volumes for the Ubi games that have this DRM would skyrocket if the DRM was never hacked and admitted it was uncrackable by the big pirate groups? Hardly.

 

you missed my point mate, my point is i can understand why a company wishes to try and implement a system that stops the hackers, i dont blame them at all for trying to protect there investment, they are paying as well it is a business for them as well, and oh im a satisfied paying customer of both SC-C and the Settlers, and you last point seems a little strange to me, the point is they are trying to stop it from happening, weather it succeeds isnt the issue, i can understand and respect them for trying to protect there investment..............

and sorry mate, but i have spoken with a number of my friends who pirate games the general statement from them is some thing like this " why pay for it when i can get it for free....would you buy it if you couldn't get it for free?.....that's a stupid question because i can get it for free".......

bottom line is companies are losing money to pirates weather its $50 or $100,000 is beside the point.......

 

This leads me to think that pirating gamers still will not buy a game just because DRM was confirmed uncrackable.
I think the point is, Ubisoft thought wrong but kudos to them for trying to protect their investment, but it won't make pirates into customers.
Now, customers are unhappy, pirates are always happy, and once DRM is removed, customers will be happy, and Ubisoft will think straight from that point on. At least they will try to protect their investment in a different method. But they can't expect to convert pirates into believers. Lesson learned for everyone.

Also, you may not have a problem with playings games at home only, but many people play games in situations where internet is not readily available, or even have slow connection. Even if it was a minor group of people, Ubisoft should've thought about the problems this will cause. Especially when that number isn't minor. It's a lot

Anyway, customers are forced to wait until cracks are released, pirates are happier that cracks are released, and some customers still will not buy the game even if cracks are available, because they don't want to support the DRM. Some customers might even go extreme measures and turn into pirates, and turn back into an honest customer once DRM is removed. Or not. Either way: Ubisoft: 0, Pirates: 1

I would LOVE to add this though, if it were true:
The game has been confirmed to be uncrackable! Sales of game has started to rise since then. Pirates are unhappy, and customers are also unhappy. Ubisoft is happy.

 

That's my point, is they're NOT protecting their investment. They're investing an ungodly amount of money for something that doesn't work. I don't think we need to have this whole debate over again.

Let's just stick to the facts:

(1) The DRM does not work
(2) Many customers (or potential customers) are not happy with the DRM
(3) Pirated versions work without the DRM for paying and non-paying customers, making them happy.

 

Wingnut, I think the important term is "trying". I mean, in practice it's an epic failure, and customers who bought it honestly are pissed right, left, and center about it, but the company should be trying to prevent piracy of their property. Not trying to say that their methods are the right way to go about it (I remember the $25 for Batman Steam sale: low price are the best anti-piracy) but there you go.

Wait really? Could've sworn...

Bah, I need glasses.

 

Apparently the game runs god awful too, *sigh*
Comon Ubisoft, if you're gonna enforce some crappy DRM at least make the game right...

 

i have to disagree with you on that one, i have both splinter cell conviction and the settlers and they both run a dream, its really not much different from steam except you cant go offline, and i don't have a issue with the DRM, i thought i would be its all cool, if been reduced to 64kpbs for using my monthly allowance and both games still run fine....

 

SC:Conviction is an awesome game, and being connected to the net isnt as big a deal as it used to be. I usually play at home where i have a constant connection. If im out and about, then i have a mobile internet dongle, since the data transferred is pretty small its well within my monthly limit

 

Trying? Paying my 2 year old $10 an hour to clean my house can be considered trying too. But it doesn't mean it makes sense. Not only that they've been "trying" for decades, spending literally hundreds of millions of dollars on different methods when the good ol' product key seems to be the easiest, least invasive, and actually pretty useful against casual theft. It costs literally nothing.

It's like spending thousands of dollars on an elaborate home security system that fails with a power outage, when a simple deadbolt lock will do.

They can try all they want, but make it transparent to the paying customer.

 

Yes the DRM was cracked with ACII, or was it SH5 first? I don't remember but it was cracked and both pirates and customers are happy. The DRM made a lot of customers not buy the game BUT! Some impatient pirates who thought there was no hope bought the game, a friend of mine who pirates games most of the time was forced by his impatience to buy AC2! I lol'd very hard when the crack was released and the look on his face when I told him. Anyways it might have had a little effect, Ubisoft's "try" did affect some pirates, but only a very small amount, I believe they still lost a lot with pirates buying is a lot less than the honest customers lost. Anyways thats my 2 cents on the topic

 

Therein lies the problem. They maybe got 20 pirates out of 500 to pay, but in turn they lost maybe 40 out of 500 normal legit customers due to the DRM's boycott. Not to mention they spent millions already developing the DRM.

 

woah my post was cut? XD I had a little chart where

Impatient Pirates forced to buy is less than the Honest Customers Lost

Therefore a big fail on ubisoft

 

i think the fact they are prepared to spend "literally hundreds of millions of dollars" is a sign that maybe they think they are losing more money than we might think.

and by this "They can try all they want, but make it transparent to the paying customer." do you mean letting the customer know what they are getting in for? if so then i think they are doing it very well, i brought both SC-C and the Settlers as a hard copy in big letters on the front of the box is a note saying "A permanent internet connection is required to play the game" and also again on the back of the box is another message stating the same info, if you where to buy from steam for example it is also clearly stated as well, all be it misleading as a high speed connection isnt needed.

 

Quite aside from the stupid DRM that will mean I never buy a Ubisoft game again (or, for that matter, any game that needs constant internet connection to play), Ubisoft have been miserably terrible at porting their games.

I think the best example of the excrescent ports vomited forth by the putrid bowels of Ubisoft has got to be the Prince of Persia sequels on PC. Prince of Persia: Sands of Time (primarily developed for PC) worked like a dream but when I bought Warrior Within (more focused on consoles) I was almost offended by how bad the controls were in comparison to the first game which, I remind you, was using the same engine. I can't comment too much on later ports because I gave up after I heard similar bad reports from later games.

 

This is like bacteria and vaccination... As soon as you develop a vaccine, the bacteria gets mutated and becomes immune to it. Vicious cycle.

 

Show me any evidence that pirating causes anywhere near the "billions of dollars of lost revenue" every year that they claim. You can't because they have no proof. Bottom line its to please the shareholders because they're all lost sheep. Everything is speculation and hot air. Several developers, Stardock comes to mind that don't even use any DRM and they have high sales.

But "transparent" is a business term meaning it's little to no hassle to the customer. Meaning it's something that's implemented that the customer doesn't even realize it's there or been changed (for the most part).

 

there are multivalued functions, just saying.

indeed, but it's more like quackery in this case.

 

i never stated that they lost billions in revenue and your logic is a little flawed mate, if they felt they didn't need to try and develop ways to stop pirates they wouldn't spend the extra money developing it, instead they would keep the shareholder happy by not spending it. and seriously i think it ignorant to think that developers don't lose money from pirates......... weather as i stated in a earlier post its $50, or $100,000 its still a loss and i can completely understand their wish to stop it from happening, did i say it was a perfect system? no, but i did say i understood where they where coming from and i actually support them in there endeavors to try and stop pirating.

some people cry that the developers are hurting the gamer by developing these DRM's i look at it differently, pirates are hurting gamers by forcing the hand of developers to take these measures......

 

There's no such thing as a "be-all, end-all" DRM as there is no "be-all, end-all" antivirus. The antivirus companies know this; there is no such thing as an anti-virus that will put an end to viruses once and for all. In this situtation you can't win the war, but they are winning many battles each time a new one pops up. Aparrently Ubisoft thinks the opposite, hoping this is the be-all, end-all solution.

 

The publishers claim it's billions of dollars lost because they say its one lost sale for every pirated game.

Pirates aren't forcing anything. If they were then ALL publishers would be using extreme DRM measures. It's the choice of the devs and publishers to do this, period. DRM is used with publishers/devs spending millions of dollars, pirates make copies. DRM isn't used, pirates make copies. I fail to see the logic in implementing DRM.

This DRM affects the paying customer by implementing restrictions, basically making every person guilty until proven innocent. Well in this case, you're just guilty without a plea.

Just becuase you understand what they're trying to do doesn't make it right. I understand the need to cut down on crime, does this mean I support the government placing video and audio surveillance in every home and have to check in and out of my own house before I leave? No.

Supporting an ideal that does something stupid makes the supporter look just as lost as the implementer. If you support it then suggest better ways that don't implicate the customer as a criminal.

Why doesn't someone actually sell a AAA quality game with two price points to test this out. One version at $30 with some very restrictive DRM like Ubi's, and one version for $50 without DRM, or at least just a product key check. See what the sales numbers are. As long as they are very clear the difference in the packages.

 

good points mate, i think more and more publishers are using anti-piracy measures, and i think that number will increase yearly as well.

but i guess you nailed it on the head "Supporting an ideal that does something stupid makes the supporter look just as lost as the implementer" but the difference is i don't think its stupid, it may not be working but that doesn't make the idea stupid just flawed, and i dont think that DRM is implying the customer is the criminal, i think that's a mistaken view, they aren't trying to punish the customer, they are just trying to protect their investment....

and as i notice we are starting to go around in circles ill leave the debate with a knowledge that we will have to agree to disagree... as im very happily playing both my games without any issues what so ever and at the end of the day mate, am very happy with my purchases, and as i paid for them i guess that's all that really matters.

 

I, as a gamer and a technology enthusiast, do not see the point of DRM as an anti piracy measure. There is no such thing as impenetrable, virtual world or real world. There are armor piercing bullets for bullet "proof" vests. There are cracks for every DRM out there.

Now what DRM will definitely succeed in is preventing the resale of a game to others. Used game sales have been quite a sizeable market, and game developers and distributors are upset that they aren't getting a cut out of it. So now, they've come up with limited activations, and account requirements, and connection requirements, and these requirements or those requirements. To the distributor, it doesn't really matter whether or not a game got pirated, when they still managed to increase sales in one way (by eliminating resale, and forcing anyone who wants the game to buy a new copy).

Regardless of the intention, the consumer loses.

 

I think these harsher and more strict DRM measures is like a carrot on a stick to the hackers/pirates.

Its like issuing a challenge that says "haha you cant beat me" and so all the more they want to crack the game.

I was always pretty neutral in the DRM/Pirate debate, but since I just went through hell a few weeks ago with BFBC2 because of Secrurom I have been turned to the side that is against DRM because I can now see how it hurts honest paying customers like myself, while the pirate is still going to be playing it with no problems.

DRM is pointless now IMO, stick with CD keys for online play and thats all you really need.

 

Not a bad game though, so long as you remember to play it stealthy rather than as a shooter (its not a very good shooter!)

A

 

This game is only worth watching the walkthrough on youtube. Not worth buying.

 

Piracy's just another flaw with humans. No one wants to pay for anything if a legit opportunity is there.

 

Well despite the DRM, I am loving this game so far.

Runs really well on my machine (some cut scenes look laggy at times), but other than that, a great buy.

I never played the other Splinter Cell games because I was never good at stealth games, but this one is quite fun.

I might have to pick up some of the older games now.

 

I'll be picking it up as soon as Ubi issues a patch removing the DRM. I don't care if it was hacked, it still won't get me to buy the game until Ubi acknowledges they've been defeated, or at least thinks well enough of their customers to offer a less restrictive DRM or none at all.

I love the Splinter Cell games. One of my favorite series. But I believe this DRM is so horrible I absolutely will not buy the game, period. I have a consistent internet connection, and most likely will play at home on my desktop. But I refuse to support this crap.