When you "buy" games... honestly, I don't think keeping these DLCs alive / online services running can be that expansive.

Yea it's not at all expensive. Since ubisoft obviously has to keep a large datacenter running for there recent releases.. And these games don't have many players, thus don't need much servers... Having 1 tiny VM running on a mega server amounts to literally pennies a month in electricity costs. Servers there days can literally have 256+ cores, terrabytes of memories. They can literally run every single game listed on like probably 1/20th of the power of a single server. They are just simply that pure evil, that they rather save the 5 cents a month and screw over thousands/millions of buyers of there games. I mean sure something more complex like an mmo where you have to maintain a store/pay for customer service ppl .. Sure, costs a bit more. But none of these games are that. They are mainly single player focused game, that ubisoft purposely put some functionality server side only, as a form of DRM. And the ones that have multiplayer, don't require further support or updates. I mean there are literally tons of solo indie devs with games older with online services still running, and for people like that , that may only have 1 or 2 games to support, and don't own servers, they are paying $50-500+ a month.. Yet they do so, because they have respect for there customers.

Cue class-action lawsuit...

Time for these companies to move to Steam, just like EA is doing recently, and Bethesda.

They could make the server files available, like the old days. Players losing access to paid DLC seems particularly bad. But, this is a consequence of moving to a centralised authentification system. One day it is decided that they no longer wish to authenticate and you are screwed. People should consider how it is not only games that share this philosophy, and how many other things in their lives are just as fragile. This is a taste of the future. It's all of your sci-fi nightmares come true.

There was a time when online games would also ship with server tools, so that gamers could create their own servers. To this day it is still possible to play CS 1.6, Unreal Tournament, Quake 3 and many more, thanks to them having server tools. This meant that companies didn't need to spend more money creating servers, as the community could do it. And it also enabled people to customize and mod servers. But them companies decided that the only servers their games could connect, was their own. So they removed server tools. This allowed companies to control paid DLC, loot boxes, micro-transactions, in-game purchases, in-game currencies and NFTs. Despite making much more money, they still refuse to support the games they made.

I have almost all these on the xbox, but i had no idea any of them had online content, but i assume they will still play in single player without any issues.....i know Zombies claim to having a online mode was that anyone on your fr list who played the game and died, you would find their back pack with their inventory in YOUR game......and that is what Ubi calls online. Lol

The servers I understand, the paid DLC is atrocious.

We'll see that the ACCC thinks about this.

and they wonder why no one wants their scam/live services that will never get the season pass dlc never get the updates and has nobody other than that 1 guy in the cellar working on it after day1 meanwhile I'm still playing Torchlight 2 online which I paid 8$ for in 2012

"users will lose access to DLC they purchased" this is called fraud.

TheDeeGee:

Time for these companies to move to Steam, just like EA is doing recently, and Bethesda.

Not too long ago, they ran to Epic, because Steam's cut was too big or something. But maybe they will crawl back, just like mentioned EA or Bethesda, which had their platforms.

That's why i support piracy

This is what games as a service and companies running games on their launchers and "always online" gets you. Apart from possible class action lawsuits (in Poland it is my understanding that this is illegal due to software being owned by the user that buys it), the secondary possibility is that people will "stop" buying games on ubisoft launcher. I personally have not bought any games on ubisoft, epic, ea origin bethesda launcher or microsoft store. I only have Steam nad GoG (and I get my hands on physical when possible). For those who wonder about this: they are not doing this to keep costs down, those are literally not showing in their balance sheet. They want to "force" players who are not buying new games to buy them by taking away the games they play now.

I've been off Ubi for a while ever since they made the reward points "expire". Used to be a relatively good company but apparently aren't keeping up with the old ways of doing business.

Thank god piracy exist. The games I own, I have pirate with the DLC so i can play them on any rig I want without dealing with the DRM and launchers. And you also dont have to worry about this issue.

You guys remember when they ware the biggest video game company even above cdpr? How times change.

PrMinisterGR:

The servers I understand, the paid DLC is atrocious.

I get shutting down the physical servers, especially if they're old and power-hungry when idle. But, the VM could be easily moved to a more efficient system. I'm sure they could get an 8-core server with a 1TB SSD and that would be enough to serve the whole world with these games while sipping practically no power when idle.

Agonist:

Thank god piracy exist. The games I own, I have pirate with the DLC so i can play them on any rig I want without dealing with the DRM and launchers. And you also dont have to worry about this issue.

Since I play games on Linux, I often have to get the no-DRM crack for games (including Uplay). I download the game through Steam and then crack it so Uplay is skipped. Makes the experience more enjoyable anyway, since that's one less piece of bloatware I have to deal with.

Maintain server isn't too expensive for sure, BUT there is a huges need of cash right now... Ubisoft latest game were not big hits at all (GR breackpoint, AC Valhala, Farcry 6 are a total "do not buy" for fan ) And also historical owner family want to take distance with Ubisoft... So there is no little money save for Ubisoft right now...

There is an easy obvious solution. Make all DLC available to all players as compensation for disabling multiplayer services. Compile a version for single-player only with all DLC attached. Now all they need to do is to have the game available for download and offline play. And they can even keep selling the offline single-player experience...