Uplay vs Steam

dreamers75

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-11-06-ubisoft-will-not-release-assassins-creed-unity-far-cry-4-and-the-crew-via-steam-in-the-uk


I honestly cant see how this is a good thing for Ubisoft. They know people unhappy with Uplay so why force them into it. Expecft uplay to be DDOS now and be unplayable for a bit.

gizmo

As I said over on the AC: Unity thread in the Games forum, I'd wager this has something to do with an exclusivity deal with GAME in the UK. Aside from the heavy promotion the retailer are doing for the title in-store, I can't think of any other logical reason why it would only affect the UK and not other European countries.

It's worth bearing in mind though that the game will still need uPlay in some form so you'll still be technically "forced" to use it regardless of where you buy it. As for a potential DDOS rendering the game unplayable, Ubisoft binned the mandatory login to uPlay for offline play back in 2011 so it wouldn't apply outside of the initial authentication.

john the one

Steam is a dream to use and if they sorted prices out it would render all other interfaces obsolete

Grumpypants

dreamers75 wrote: »

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-11-06-ubisoft-will-not-release-assassins-creed-unity-far-cry-4-and-the-crew-via-steam-in-the-uk


I honestly cant see how this is a good thing for Ubisoft. They know people unhappy with Uplay so why force them into it. Expecft uplay to be DDOS now and be unplayable for a bit.

In your paycheque at the end of the month would you like 100% of your pay or 70%?

Steam is useful for companies who don't have their own digital distribution method as it avoids the huge costs involved in delivering digital content but it is expensive to use.

Why would ubisoft pay 30% of their income to steam to do something they can do themselves?

dreamers75

Grumpypants wrote: »

In your paycheque at the end of the month would you like 100% of your pay or 70%?

Steam is useful for companies who don't have their own digital distribution method as it avoids the huge costs involved in delivering digital content but it is expensive to use.

Why would ubisoft pay 30% of their income to steam to do something they can do themselves?

Have you used Uplay? I would agree if it was a functioning piece of software that did not randomly delete game saves. When it uploads to the cloud it means it!

Kirby

The rationale behind not being on steam is sound. Ubisoft don't want to bolster a competitor when they have their own service.....but Uplay is just irritating to use. I'd prefer to use Steam or Origin tbh.

Kiith

Stupid decision from them, but doesn't really make much difference if you had planned on buying it anyway. It still uses and launches from UPlay.

For some reason though, i can still buy the Season Pass, but not the full game? Makes sense...

Grumpypants

dreamers75 wrote: »

Have you used Uplay? I would agree if it was a functioning piece of software that did not randomly delete game saves. When it uploads to the cloud it means it!

Yeah for the most part it's fine, enter code, click download, play game. But like them all there is room to improve.

It can go a bit mental installing patches every time i load Blacklist, and like steam it is a pain if you want to move games around hard drives due to space limitations. It just doesn't seem to like it. I've had to restart world in conflict 4 times between changing PC's and moving from SSD to external, but that also happened with Rage on Steam so it's nothing new, the only one that gets that right is Origin which is a simple copy paste job.

I'd say as this is just UK based and they are still selling it on Steam elsewhere it is a test to see how it works out. If they can pull it from the UK without a massive impact they will likely do similar for other regions moving forward.

dreamers75

Forgot about Blacklist

Falthyron

Kirby wrote: »

The rationale behind not being on steam is sound. Ubisoft don't want to bolster a competitor when they have their own service.....but Uplay is just irritating to use. I'd prefer to use Steam or Origin tbh.

Then why remove the games from the U.K and not everywhere? This has something to do with a deal with GAME, or some such. GAME isn't in Ireland, but if it was, it would be interesting to know if it would also be removed from Steam for Irish consumers.

mayordenis

It seems like UK was just the first, looks like it might be happening to all regions now.

dreamers75

Do Game still sell PC games?

Grumpypants

Yeah normally just the "chart" titles rather than a big selection. But they also have digital codes and boxed PC games on the website.

Falthyron

mayordenis wrote: »

It seems like UK was just the first, looks like it might be happening to all regions now.

Fúck! I just checked my Steam and you are right. It has been removed now. :mad:

TerrorFirmer

I don't really get the big deal, as it would have launched through uplay via steam anyway? Same as Far Cry 3 etc.

Falthyron

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

I don't really get the big deal, as it would have launched through uplay via steam anyway? Same as Far Cry 3 etc.

Steam is a far more stable distribution system. Installing, patching, etc., is easier when the servers are always up. uPlay is renowned for going down often and for long periods.

VinLieger

Falthyron wrote: »

Steam is a far more stable distribution system. Installing, patching, etc., is easier when the servers are always up. uPlay is renowned for going down often and for long periods.

Specifically during launches and it doesn't matter if the game you want to play is single player offline if the play login servers are busted as frequently happens during big launches you won't be playing anything

RoyalCelt

With steam growing so big and Valve charging such high rates I can see all the big publishers leaving steam and selling from their own services like Origin and Uplay. I'd say we'll see a lot of this in future.

VinLieger

RoyalCelt wrote: »

With steam growing so big and Valve charging such high rates I can see all the big publishers leaving steam and selling from their own services like Origin and Uplay. I'd say we'll see a lot of this in future.

Neither of which have a single successful launch without and problems in the past two year's. I have no problem with a little more competition in the market but have you looked at the prices on Uplay or Origin? They aren't competitive yet and their launch record's and service is abysmal.

gizmo

VinLieger wrote: »

Neither of which have a single successful launch without and problems in the past two year's. I have no problem with a little more competition in the market but have you looked at the prices on Uplay or Origin? They aren't competitive yet and their launch record's and service is abysmal.

What problems had Origin with titles at launch? I know UPlay has had its issues during these periods but any EA-related problems have been game side and nothing to do with Origin itself as far as I can remember.

Skerries

I'd say they would get more than 30% extra in sales when it is on Steam than trying to sell through their own system so they are actually making a loss this way

nesf

gizmo wrote: »

What problems had Origin with titles at launch? I know UPlay has had its issues during these periods but any EA-related problems have been game side and nothing to do with Origin itself as far as I can remember.

There were issues with the Sim City launch where pre-orders weren't unlocking on people's accounts, iirc. I think it was resolved fairly quickly but it was a thing for a while. It didn't get as much coverage as the game's server difficulties though.

Gbear

I'd say the real loss for them will be people browsing games or seeing them pop up on sales.

If you were planning on buying it or if you tend to get your games from bricks and mortar, you'll probably still get it.

But people who use Steam for all their gaming might just forget about it.

gizmo

nesf wrote: »

There were issues with the Sim City launch where pre-orders weren't unlocking on people's accounts, iirc. I think it was resolved fairly quickly but it was a thing for a while. It didn't get as much coverage as the game's server difficulties though.

Ah, so there was. The stories seem buried in the stories about...well, everything else wrong with the game at launch.

Any others I'm missing? Crysis 3, Battlefield 4, Mass Effect 3, Titanfall, The Sims, the FIFAs and the Need For Speeds were all released without Origin-related problems, right?

Gbear wrote: »

I'd say the real loss for them will be people browsing games or seeing them pop up on sales.

If you were planning on buying it or if you tend to get your games from bricks and mortar, you'll probably still get it.

But people who use Steam for all their gaming might just forget about it.

Or pirate it, judging by a fairly substantial quantity of comments across various gaming sites. *sigh*

Angron

Not a fan of uplay (I hate having to launch uplay through steam to launch another game), but I won't pirate a game cause it's just on uplay now. I can deal with it for a game I really wanna play.

Kiith

gizmo wrote: »

Or pirate it, judging by a fairly substantial quantity of comments across various gaming sites. *sigh*

I'd say the vast majority of those people were going to pirate it anyway, but will now try to justify it by saying they hate UPlay.

Laviski

Kiith wrote: »

I'd say the vast majority of those people were going to pirate it anyway, but will now try to justify it by saying they hate UPlay.

i bought a game through uplay and actually had to get a pirate version in order to play it properly cause i had so many isuses with their DRM this was going back during their early days. i have no problems with this as i have a legitimate key so there is nothing wrong except their service.

needless to say i i have vowed never to buy/play a ubisoft game again and still to this day haven't.

the market is saturated with a lot of a good games and not enough time to play. yes some of the up coming releases look tempting but i choose to ignore once i know it came from ubisoft.

gizmo

Laviski wrote: »

i bought a game through uplay and actually had to get a pirate version in order to play it properly cause i had so many isuses with their DRM this was going back during their early days. i have no problems with this as i have a legitimate key so there is nothing wrong except their service.

needless to say i i have vowed never to buy/play a ubisoft game again and still to this day haven't.

the market is saturated with a lot of a good games and not enough time to play. yes some of the up coming releases look tempting but i choose to ignore once i know it came from ubisoft.

You are, of course, more than entitled to hold that view and I'd always encourage people to vote with their wallets but do you not think services can be improved over time and are worth re-evaluating at a later date?

I mean, to put it in context, Steam completely fell over during the Half Life 2 release leaving many of us completely unable to play a game we had purchased at retail. The service has obviously improved immeasurably since then so imagine how much I would have missed if I continued to boycott them till now?

nesf

gizmo wrote: »

You are, of course, more than entitled to hold that view and I'd always encourage people to vote with their wallets but do you not think services can be improved over time and are worth re-evaluating at a later date?

I mean, to put it in context, Steam completely fell over during the Half Life 2 release leaving many of us completely unable to play a game we had purchased at retail. The service has obviously improved immeasurably since then so imagine how much I would have missed if I continued to boycott them till now?

People tolerate Steam as DRM because it makes their lives easier with library and patch management and seamlessly integrates with the Steam store. There's also some social elements. And it took years for people to forgive Valve for the HL2 launch. U-Play has the same problem as Origin does, it's not managing a big library and doesn't give you access to many games to buy either. There's not a compelling reason to use either platform other than Ubisoft/EA forcing you to use it. DRM needs to be seemless or it needs to offer some kind of trade, e.g. Amazon's ebook DRM in exchange for the simplicity and convenience of buying books on Amazon and putting them on your Kindle.

gizmo

nesf wrote: »

People tolerate Steam as DRM because it makes their lives easier with library and patch management and seamlessly integrates with the Steam store. There's also some social elements. And it took years for people to forgive Valve for the HL2 launch. U-Play has the same problem as Origin does, it's not managing a big library and doesn't give you access to many games to buy either. There's not a compelling reason to use either platform other than Ubisoft/EA forcing you to use it. DRM needs to be seemless or it needs to offer some kind of trade, e.g. Amazon's ebook DRM in exchange for the simplicity and convenience of buying books on Amazon and putting them on your Kindle.

Oh, I'm not disputing any of that. I'm referring specifically to the wording of Laviski's post where he said he would never play an Ubisoft game again due to his initial bad experience of UPlay. To expand on my original question, would that still hold true if UPlay were to, by some miracle, improve to the point that it was as good as Steam?

On a more general note, I find the whole "not on Steam = no purchase" logic to be an interesting one. Some people seem to be resistant to the idea of any alternative to Steam being a requirement while others seem happy at the idea of an alternative if it was as feature complete and had a similar usability level to Steam. When the openness of the PC as a platform is one of its biggest advantages, it seems odd to me that some people would be so against the idea of any competition to Steam, even in theory.

Falthyron

gizmo wrote: »

Oh, I'm not disputing any of that. I'm referring specifically to the wording of Laviski's post where he said he would never play an Ubisoft game again due to his initial bad experience of UPlay. To expand on my original question, would that still hold true if UPlay were to, by some miracle, improve to the point that it was as good as Steam?

On a more general note, I find the whole "not on Steam = no purchase" logic to be an interesting one. Some people seem to be resistant to the idea of any alternative to Steam being a requirement while others seem happy at the idea of an alternative if it was as feature complete and had a similar usability level to Steam. When the openness of the PC as a platform is one of its biggest advantages, it seems odd to me that some people would be so against the idea of any competition to Steam, even in theory.

I reckon the whole thing comes down to convenience. Do you do all your shopping in Dunnes? Or Tescos? Or do you mix it up and buy some items in Tesco and some in Supervalu? Do you prefer all your books on your Kindle, or would you only read hardbacks? Are all your movies on DvD or BluRay? Or do you mix them up depending on the film; action films = BluRay, dramas = DvD?

It is convenient to have all your games in one, easy to use, location. I don't want to have multiple accounts to play my games. I just want one account to play my games and Steam has the best catalogue, easiest interface, and some really good deals from time to time. This is further enhanced by being able to buy Steam keys in many different locations.

Competition is good, but UbiSoft aren't being competitive, they are infact being anti-consumerist. They are eliminating choice for their consumers. If they want gamers to use uPlay and buy games on uPlay then give them reasons to use that software, make changes to improve its features and functionality. Forcing gamers to use it, will only result in more resistance to it.

Slot Machine

I must agree with Falthyron but not for the same reason. Uplay, Origin and whatever other services might pop up aren't competing because they're only selling their own games. Publishers actively removing games from Steam only to sell them on their own platforms makes this all the clearer.

Real competition would be platforms like Steam that sell games from multiple publishers all competing with one another, not, to quote one person, "single publisher ghettos". I'm sure there's always going to be resistance to anything not-Steam but in their current incarnations there are good reasons not to support the alternatives.

nesf

gizmo wrote: »

Oh, I'm not disputing any of that. I'm referring specifically to the wording of Laviski's post where he said he would never play an Ubisoft game again due to his initial bad experience of UPlay. To expand on my original question, would that still hold true if UPlay were to, by some miracle, improve to the point that it was as good as Steam?

On a more general note, I find the whole "not on Steam = no purchase" logic to be an interesting one. Some people seem to be resistant to the idea of any alternative to Steam being a requirement while others seem happy at the idea of an alternative if it was as feature complete and had a similar usability level to Steam. When the openness of the PC as a platform is one of its biggest advantages, it seems odd to me that some people would be so against the idea of any competition to Steam, even in theory.

It's pretty understandable for people to not want to have multiple front ends to their library. It's also extremely understandable that people want to have their games "in" Steam to simplify having a big game library (Steam already allows you to do this with most non-Steam games). The last part is that I'm much happier buying a game through Steam, GOG, Origin or UPlay than a private shop set up by a developer.

Falthyron

Slot Machine wrote: »

I must agree with Falthyron but not for the same reason. Uplay, Origin and whatever other services might pop up aren't competing because they're only selling their own games. Publishers actively removing games from Steam only to sell them on their own platforms makes this all the clearer.

Real competition would be platforms like Steam that sell games from multiple publishers all competing with one another, not, to quote one person, "single publisher ghettos". I'm sure there's always going to be resistance to anything not-Steam but in their current incarnations there are good reasons not to support the alternatives.

Indeed, and not only that but Origin and uPlay are generally more expensive. One example: Splinter Cell: Blacklist Deluxe Edition on Origin is €39.99 and on Steam it is €29.99. Origin and uPlay need to offer something more, something unique to Steam to make users switch over or purchase on those services. If uPlay was cheaper, or DRM free, or buy 1 get 1 free kinda thing, maybe it would encourage users to purchase on it. Same would apply to Origin, as both have inferior catalogues and more expensive content.

Maximus Alexander

I genuinely haven't bought a single Ubisoft game since the first time I was forced to use Uplay.

Steam is a dream to use and it's where I make the majority of my purchases. After initially feeling frosty towards Origin, I have have come around to its more recent incarnation which is less cluttered and buggy.

Uplay can feck off though. Left a very bad taste in my mouth and I really don't need another DRM shop application on my machine.

Laviski

gizmo wrote: »

You are, of course, more than entitled to hold that view and I'd always encourage people to vote with their wallets but do you not think services can be improved over time and are worth re-evaluating at a later date?

I mean, to put it in context, Steam completely fell over during the Half Life 2 release leaving many of us completely unable to play a game we had purchased at retail. The service has obviously improved immeasurably since then so imagine how much I would have missed if I continued to boycott them till now?

i've being using my steam account since cs source was released and being perfectly honest never had a complaint. yes steam severs have gone down but as i work in the IT industry i able to accept that. nothing is ever 100% uptime and there are hiccups along the way.

my issues was a intentional design by ubi-soft regarding their DRM. the fact i had to pirate a game that i legitimately paid and got terrible service through their CC was astounding and left real sour taste. that is the only reason why i refused to give them any money since then and yes will continue to do so.

yes steam is a form of DRM but it was ever as bad as the design of ubi soft as well with their contact support after 3 installs of the game. any trouble i had with steam i was able to switch to offline mode and carry on and generally it was only a server access issue which is increasingly rare.

Unfortunately fact of life as you get older the amount of game time is decreasing. there is plenty of other game titles to occupy my ever decreasing game time.

Sierra Oscar

At least Steam, and to some extent Origin, offer the user some decent features in return for actually using the software. Uplay is old school style DRM in my view.

Falthyron

Assassin's Creed: Unity is available again on Steam to pre-order.

EDIT: As is Far Cry 4.

Dacelonid

Yeah can see it there now.
Is this a climbdown by Ubisofft???

Falthyron

Dacelonid wrote: »

Yeah can see it there now.
Is this a climbdown by Ubisofft???

The same happened to Watch_Dogs. It was available to pre-order for a few months, then a number of weeks before launch it disappeared from Steam. I believe it returned a few days before general release. Very bizarre. Is UbiSoft just testing the water to see if there would be much outcry if their games were no longer on Steam and perhaps they could go it alone with just uPlay on PC?

Overheal

uplay is bothersome.

Gbear

Overheal wrote: »

uplay is bothersome.

This is the internet.

You're not frothing at the mouth enough.

Vicxas

Both Steam and Uplay have had horrible interfaces, Steam has had a markable improvement recently but Uplay just feels dirty on my HDD.


Im a bad gamer, a very bad gamer.

Robert ninja

I'll take a DRM free version any day of the week over Uplay or Steam, but steam comes second simply because it's a nice place to keep all my games, even emulated ones. Makes it easy to invite friends to multiplayer games, too. There's actually DRM-free games on steam.

gizmo wrote: »

Oh, I'm not disputing any of that. I'm referring specifically to the wording of Laviski's post where he said he would never play an Ubisoft game again due to his initial bad experience of UPlay. To expand on my original question, would that still hold true if UPlay were to, by some miracle, improve to the point that it was as good as Steam?

On a more general note, I find the whole "not on Steam = no purchase" logic to be an interesting one. Some people seem to be resistant to the idea of any alternative to Steam being a requirement while others seem happy at the idea of an alternative if it was as feature complete and had a similar usability level to Steam. When the openness of the PC as a platform is one of its biggest advantages, it seems odd to me that some people would be so against the idea of any competition to Steam, even in theory.

I actually really respect self-publishing and it makes a lot of sense for Ubisoft to not want one of their competitors to pocket 30% of every sale of their VERY popular series'. It makes sense to them, but the consumer just feels like they're being forced to use Uplay, which they are - but it's either that or be forced to use steam which to some people is an even worse proposition if they value customer service and consumer protection. You're forced with DRM either way. The only answer is DRM-free and Ubisoft will never do that because they're actually quite stupid, really. The people making decisions there have NO idea what their consumers actually want - they just know there's casual gamers who will eat up every iteration of Ass creed and that gets them fat Christmas bonuses so who cares.

I don't buy modern Ubisoft games, most one of them are complete garbo and the ones that are decent/fun do nothing new and don't do it as good as some other game (child of light for example). Uplay is the cherry on that mud cake. I'm actually glad they're off steam, it means I won't even be tempted to pick up one of their lame games because it's 5 quid on steam. That's actually the price I payed for Far Cry 3, the only game Uplay game I had to deal with and it was a horrendous experience that made me remove Uplay after forcing myself to sit through that terrible game. I don't know how people think that was somehow better than FC2 but I won't even get started on that.

gizmo

Falthyron wrote: »

It is convenient to have all your games in one, easy to use, location. I don't want to have multiple accounts to play my games. I just want one account to play my games and Steam has the best catalogue, easiest interface, and some really good deals from time to time. This is further enhanced by being able to buy Steam keys in many different locations.

You do recognise the danger in the widespread adoption/dominance of one retailer in the marketplace though? This is part of the reason I find the fixation on Steam to be somewhat troubling when you consider the possible long term implications. Do we really want one retailer taking 30% from such a huge proportion of sales on the PC? Especially when it's one which people already complain about the new and non-sale prices on?

Falthyron wrote: »

Competition is good, but UbiSoft aren't being competitive, they are infact being anti-consumerist. They are eliminating choice for their consumers. If they want gamers to use uPlay and buy games on uPlay then give them reasons to use that software, make changes to improve its features and functionality. Forcing gamers to use it, will only result in more resistance to it.

I'm loath to level this accusation at Ubisoft and not others though. If I want to buy a recent EA game or Valve game I have to use their respective services too, just because the latter offer a considerably better experience with their service does not make it any more of less anti-consumer in that respect.

Slot Machine wrote: »

I must agree with Falthyron but not for the same reason. Uplay, Origin and whatever other services might pop up aren't competing because they're only selling their own games. Publishers actively removing games from Steam only to sell them on their own platforms makes this all the clearer.

Real competition would be platforms like Steam that sell games from multiple publishers all competing with one another, not, to quote one person, "single publisher ghettos". I'm sure there's always going to be resistance to anything not-Steam but in their current incarnations there are good reasons not to support the alternatives.

Very true. It's why I'm extremely interested to see how GoG's Galaxy service goes.

Laviski wrote: »

i've being using my steam account since cs source was released and being perfectly honest never had a complaint. yes steam severs have gone down but as i work in the IT industry i able to accept that. nothing is ever 100% uptime and there are hiccups along the way.

Ah, you missed the HL2 release fiasco then, lucky you.

But yes, servers going down don't bother me, it happens as you're well aware. You missed the only real significant issue with Steam and I guess that's what I was getting at. They ****ed up, they improved massively, people forgave them and then went back to them. I was just curious as to whether that would apply to you with regards UPlay. You're far from the only one to say such a thing which is why I'm curious as to your take on it.

RoyalCelt

VinLieger wrote: »

Neither of which have a single successful launch without and problems in the past two year's. I have no problem with a little more competition in the market but have you looked at the prices on Uplay or Origin? They aren't competitive yet and their launch record's and service is abysmal.

I 100% agree with you but I still think it will happen even though it's a bad thing.

Activision were selling MW3 this year at €60 on the PSN store about 3 years after release. So rip off prices can be found all over the place.

Even in the game stores. I now buy my games from the US PSN instead and save an average of $30 per game. Prices are a joke.

Grumpypants

Originally Posted by VinLieger View Post
I have no problem with a little more competition in the market but have you looked at the prices on Uplay or Origin? They aren't competitive yet and their launch record's and service is abysmal.

looking at the prices on some recent titles. Looks like they are all pretty much the same.

Football manager 2015
Steam €49.99
Uplay €49.99

Evil within
Uplay €49.99
Steam €59.99

Alien Isolation
Uplay €49.99
Steam €49.99

Assassin's Creed Unity
Steam €59.99
Origin €59.99
Uplay €59.99

As for knocking down prices Origin have decent sales all the time, right now you can get Assassin's creed 2 for €2.50 or Mirrors edge & Assassin's creed 3 for a fiver. Their games under a tenner section has plenty on offer Crysis 3, mass effect 3, medal of honor, need for speed, dead space 3 all €9.99. I also got world in conflict for €1.79 on Uplay before.

Glebee

Trying to download Watch Dogs on Uplay. Never remember it being this slow.
Downloading since 9am this morning and still only 57% complete. Ah well just another 422hours 24min to completion acording to the meter....:mad:

sharmander

I have problems with Ubisoft games recognizing my graphics cards, so even Child of Light chugged so hard it would only run in slow motion. Heartbreaking because I was so hyped to play that and Valiant Hearts on my computer, and it was such a waste of money buying Child of Light on release day.

degrassinoel

Glebee wrote: »

Trying to download Watch Dogs on Uplay. Never remember it being this slow.
Downloading since 9am this morning and still only 57% complete. Ah well just another 422hours 24min to completion acording to the meter....:mad:

ye could watch the entire game on youtube in less time than it's taking you to download it from Uplay