Ubisoft dumping Starforce

[dodger42]

Unfortunately it seems only new games wont have SF.

 

 

http://www.theinquirer.org/?article=30981

[Nate--IRL--]

Unfortunately there is no hard evidence to support this.

 

Nate

[NEODARK]

Everyone should take an example from morrowind :P

[bflagg]

5..........

 

4.......

 

3....

 

2..

 

1.

 

Scha-winnnnnng !!!!!

LOCKED

[SwingKid]

Scha-winnnnnng !!!!!

LOCKED

 

lockon.ru topics don't get locked - they get deleted.

 

Unless you post something to rescue it, like -

 

I WANT THE MIG-29K!!!!

 

;)

-SK

[Force_Feedback]

I want fluffy ejection seats with a working amssage function! Also, the chopper will have to get a "giant tail slug" like in Carmageddon (like a mace attatched at the rear end) to bushwhack all those annoying Igla and Stinger Jihadists. Also, we need a skin of a pilot with a beard and an ak-74.

[Crusty]

I wont go into the problems I have had with starfu*k, remember there is an embedded fanboi-ninja outfit waiting to launch a brainless stream of abuse at anyone who does so

[SwingKid]

I want fluffy ejection seats with a working amssage function! Also, the chopper will have to get a "giant tail slug" like in Carmageddon (like a mace attatched at the rear end) to bushwhack all those annoying Igla and Stinger Jihadists. Also, we need a skin of a pilot with a beard and an ak-74.

 

Ok I'm stumped. Which moderator would THAT appeal to?

 

:confused:

-SK

[bflagg]

Even from the grave this moderator still active.

 

[hitman]

Is there ANY truth to this or is this shit fanboi crap?

[warthogmadman987]

from some other places i have read... Ubisoft could be in for it with starforce. Not just something lame... thats just what i read, wonder what happens

[bflagg]

Is there ANY truth to this or is this shit fanboi crap?

 

 

It's probably fanboi stuff and I will believe it only when I see it.

[Dutch60]

It is true look here: http://www.gamespot.com/news/6147655.html

 

Let us simply hope this does not mean a Q4 release of LOBS

[hitman]

no rugg...that was directed at that site posted. Personally i think this is a bunch of crap if you ask me...

[Alfa]

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6147655.html

 

Let us simply hope this does not mean a Q4 release of LOBS

 

Whatever Ubisoft does is totally irrelevant to LOBS, as Ubisoft has nothing to do with it :) .

 

- JJ.

[NEODARK]

Whatever Ubisoft does is totally irrelevant to LOBS, as Ubisoft has nothing to do with it :) .

 

- JJ.

 

oh, darn it :P

 

But, yes. This only applies to new games coming out. And BS and UBI are not related like Alpha said. (they stopped after lomac 1.0 I think, someone will mention the correct time)

[hitman]

Patch 1.01 removed it. And it was so easy to get around it too...worked perfectly on my farstone gamedrive cdrom emulator.

[S77th-GOYA]

http://forums-fr.ubi.com/groupee/forums/a/tpc/f/7501009903/m/9071096924/r/7911042234#7911042234

 

The horses mouth. The horse speaks French, by the way.

[Starlight]

The shame is that LOBS will quite surely have SF protection. The other shame is that there are many examples of games which sold very well even without copy protection, Oblivion, for example, or X-plane if you want to stay in the flight-sim community. They just have DVD-checks.

 

Adding Starforce to a game makes the game price rise, because you have to pay Starforce and hire some more people to answer about copy protection issues, since there were a lot of them.

 

My opinion is still that a game with a simple cd-check sells more than a game with a hard and criticized copy protection.

[Shotsx74]

StarForce dumped...

 

K so since star force was dumped by ubi, does this effect FC in anyway at all being that its an addon and everything??? I hope not but i am glad that they dumoed em its was a good envestment for future things...

[hitman]

they just had a thread about this. Nope. Starforce is still in LOBS.

[169th_Dredd]

Comparing different demographics in relation to sales and protection methods...

The easier the protection can be broken, the easier non-paying people get their hands on it, the less money the developer makes from sales, which in turn leaves less money for resources and future additions, projects, and in turn robs 'YOU' of the hard earned money used to buy 'YOUR' copy of the product.

 

I'll support copy-protection. Especially for ED, top product, best SIM ever! And I respect their right to protect it.

 

As for UBI.... well... who cares.

My 2 cents.

[Guest IguanaKing]

Yup...BS has nothing to do with UBI. But...although I have not had problems with SF, personally, there are many who have. This decision on the part of ED may just cost them a few customers. Just stating a fact that there are many who have had problems with it. They've already lost me though, with not being able to address simple avionics issues in existing Western aircraft after numerous patches. I praise them for focusing on weapons capabilities, but, truthfully, those are all classified...and I'm not sure what position anyone here thinks they are in to say "Yay or nay" regarding weapons fidelity. Notice how the known, actual F-15 drivers usually don't comment on the "What missile is better..." threads? Its because they can't...although I'm sure they enjoy a laugh or two that nobody here will ever know about. But basic avionics functions?...Yeah...those are well-known and severely lacking in this sim. The lack of capitalizing on existing computer technology also disturbs me a little. Not meaning to slam you guys, but update your Western aircraft avionics to work like they do IRL (and HAVE for the last 30 years), and understand that the wave of the future is not about raw processor power...it is about using other methods to harness what is physically possible. On second thought...just start with basic Western avionics functions...then go from there.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

I don't care for UBI. They dropped Lock On long time ago and that alone takes UBI off my favorites list.

 

I do support copy protection for Lock On and personaly am not aware of haveing any problem with StarForce. More money for ED more chances we will get more of LOMAC, FC, LOBS, F-16 and etc ...

[BIOLOG]

Yup...BS has nothing to do with UBI. But...although I have not had problems with SF, personally, there are many who have. This decision on the part of ED may just cost them a few customers. Just stating a fact that there are many who have had problems with it. They've already lost me though, with not being able to address simple avionics issues in existing Western aircraft after numerous patches. I praise them for focusing on weapons capabilities, but, truthfully, those are all classified...and I'm not sure what position anyone here thinks they are in to say "Yay or nay" regarding weapons fidelity. Notice how the known, actual F-15 drivers usually don't comment on the "What missile is better..." threads? Its because they can't...although I'm sure they enjoy a laugh or two that nobody here will ever know about. But basic avionics functions?...Yeah...those are well-known and severely lacking in this sim. The lack of capitalizing on existing computer technology also disturbs me a little. Not meaning to slam you guys, but update your Western aircraft avionics to work like they do IRL (and HAVE for the last 30 years), and understand that the wave of the future is not about raw processor power...it is about using other methods to harness what is physically possible. On second thought...just start with basic Western avionics functions...then go from there.

 

Have Faith Iguanaking, I'm sure they'll work with avionics in their next projext... But I'm guessing (hoping) they will start with Flanker (although Ideally for me it would be Fulcrum), and then move on to eagle and others.

What would make sence, is if they make F-16 with AFM (seem to remember reading some speculation about that a while back), they would have to make MiG-29 with AFM, to keep game balanced... And if they improve avionics for these 2 aircraft, that would be good. But that's years away... Btw, what specific functions did U have in mind?:)