Ubisoft distributes cracking group's no-CD patch as official

r6vegas2.jpg

"Neilthecellist", a user on game publisher Ubisoft's official message boards, took a peek inside the official no-CD patch that had been released for Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six: Vegas 2 and discovered that it had been released before — as an crack from piracy distribution group Reloaded.

A swamp of irony: that the game's DRM caused so many problems for customers that a no-CD patch had to be released in the first place; that Ubisoft had no problem redistributing someone else's code as their own; that Ubisoft had plenty of time to implement a DRM system before the game went on sale but no programming resources to create their own to fix the problems they created for legitimate customers.

In all, though, I think it's a fairly sly way to acknowledge the tacit symbiosis between publishers and cracking groups. Publishers release crippled games; cracking groups fix them. (And then let people download them for free, unfortunately.) I'm doubt that pointing out this relationship was Ubisoft's intention.

R6Vegas2_Fix.zip is the same as the ReLoaded no-dvd crack [Forums.UBI.com]

Join the Conversation

8 Comments

  1. This is very incredible, but I can see Ubisoft’s side of it: why bother paying someone to program our own NoCD? Reloaded simply hacked our executable and redistributed it, though they had no legal right to do so. It’s essentially our IP and our assets anyway.

  2. I totally see their side of it. I don’t really have an issue with what they actually did. It’s just really funny that they had to resort to using a piracy group crack.

  3. I think it’s funny because it shows that copy protection is worthless for anything except the most casual of piracy. It might prevent someone from just installing the game on their friend’s PC, but that’s about it.

  4. I think it’s funnier that some guy in a basement does a better job coding then programming team at Ubi soft.

  5. “I think it’s funnier that some guy in a basement does a better job coding then programming team at Ubi soft.”

    That’s not necessarily the case. It’s just way easier to use someone else’s work instead of writing something oneself.

    There’s the rebuttal from a Ubi rep that (paraphrased), essentially reads “why would we have to do that? We own the original unrestricted executable”, and that makes sense really.

    This is a handy slap in the face to slavering, foaming-at-the-mouth industry reps who’d be happy to crucify anyone who even dreams of buying a game and not having to prove to the game that you did indeed buy it… but at the same time the reason for it is probably just the work of some lazy or inept employee somewhere who made a bad, rogue decision and embarrassed their employer.

  6. “Publishers release crippled games; cracking groups fix them. (And then let people download them for free, unfortunately.)”

    Unfortunately? 😀

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *