Failed Digital Offerings
Failed Digital Offerings
Hello everyone, I aim to examine whether any weaknesses exist in my skepticism regarding my case about a missing DLC from a Ubi game. To clarify, here’s a brief timeline of events for quick reference:
1. Received a key from an unauthorized online service for a GOLD Edition of Black Flag (dated 14/3/2015).
2. Due to a demanding work schedule spanning over eight years, I’ve had limited time to play games lately—starting mid-2019 and finishing near the end of that year.
3. When attempting to play the Freedom Cry DLC, I discovered it wasn’t available.
4. I reached out to Ubisoft for assistance, but they directed me to the retailer instead.
5. They denied further help, citing a two-year support obligation that has expired.
6. Now Ubisoft is only discussing approved online retailers for key purchases, not offering any support beyond that.
Reflecting on this:
- Why rely on an unauthorized service when a system designed to verify keys should have covered all DLC?
- Why invest time in installing and playing a software with no release date or physical form, yet still sold by the company?
This is not just about a car or toaster—it’s about software ethics and my right to access content.
P.S. Sorry for the rant; I’m still being scrutinized as someone outdated in computing ethics.
Best regards, K.S.
The store handles the content it offers, not Ubi. Ubi is the publisher who distributes or rents keys to retailers or sells them in their own outlets. A two-year warranty is sufficient for modern games—it often exceeds what you receive from physical or many digital keys. The key might have come from a different package or similar source.
Secondly, the warranty and return window begin at the moment of purchase. It applies to everything you buy, regardless of when you use it. Whether you buy a phone today and use it four years later doesn’t change the fact that the warranty started when you bought the product, not when you activated or registered it. Exceptions exist only on certain platforms like Origin or Steam, which offer 24-48 hour returns after activation plus two weeks from purchase. Ultimately, once you’re in the digital space, stores can easily dismiss claims. In my experience, there’s little you can do. I’m a bit skeptical, but I’ve encountered this before with Ubi and other titles. I purchased Anno 2070 on Steam for a discount. Initially, playing it needed an Ubi account and the Ubi launcher—it was a hassle, but manageable. The bigger frustration is that many games depend on constant server access; when I tried to return to them after years of use, the servers had gone offline. One indie game faced the same problem—developers could have kept it offline, but they didn’t. Now I’m left with two games that are completely inaccessible.
I regret to say I’m inclined to disagree, though I’ll try to justify my stance. I operate under an ISO standard, serving as a client service export manager for over eight years now. My position is clear—I’ll defend it accordingly. Whether you lease or sell, the asset remains the property of the original owner, carrying all rights and responsibilities concerning any damages or missing elements. Even if you acquire a vehicle or audio system, the parent company stays accountable (even if you bypass the intermediary who sold the item). Picture a store acting as a physical gatekeeper between you and the main company, which handles all support and potential issues.
Once a key is stored, it stays there until it’s purchased and utilized. But when the digital service behind it continues to operate online, I question why I should bear the consequences of its flaws. It’s not a physical box where mistakes can be lost or misused—it’s a single key encompassing everything. The intermediary is irrelevant and holds no real value in these circumstances.
I understand I’m not young anymore (I started with an Amiga 500 and a MegaDrive). The problem here is straightforward for newer systems. They don’t grasp what they should provide, and for me personally, I can’t imagine an industry thriving on a capitalized model where physical copies are absent. I’d rather not support services that shut down suddenly, especially when I already own a key to every title.
Accepting this reality, I’ll discontinue using Humble Bundle (and similar platforms) and shift to piracy as a safer alternative. Capitalism’s pressure is real, but these companies continue because they profit from it. Ubisoft’s decision to halt their services feels like a betrayal, and I won’t support them anymore.
My frustration stems from their attitude, not just the facts. My priority is getting the content I deserve—without risking further losses.
P.S. Sorry for the lengthy explanation; I made some spelling and grammar mistakes. English isn’t my first language, and I appreciate your patience. Thank you for reading.
you expect the product you paid for. Your job is to verify it matches your payment. If it doesn’t, report the issue to the store. If they can’t or won’t help, escalate to the manufacturer or publisher. If they refuse, contact consumer protection agencies. That’s how things usually unfold in this region and most EU countries. The digital age makes it tough to pinpoint responsibility and secure justice, especially after the seller or producer has already ended their agreement.
LoL, sorry mate, but I can't take it as industry thing (please, don't take it as an insult, we are here to discuss a theme and I really like a good conversation). A conversation starts always by a disagreement and what should arise of it, will be the sum of all the opinions expressed (Agora 101). In the industry in which I work, we are actually still in obligation for each and every product (custom made for all the clients of our clients) for the lifetime of the product... And the lifetime can be very, very long... And the frakking client can give you shit for a non visible by the naked eye difference between 0,09mm and 0,13mm (which is a real claim by the way, that cost us more than Χ0.000 euros in damage). We are making products all over the world and for all the big sharks (sorry, I meant industries) of the world market... But most importantly, we actually are in obligation to repair, modify or even change a product which is not compliant to the standard imposed between the 2 parties and in which the final client can maybe not even see it. And believe it or not, we are working on a micron scale... Anyway, there is no need to continue on this path. I can see that the consumerism is strong in the people and believe it or not, laws have to be modified to reflect just cause. Laws should not be taken as granted as long as there is no logic behind it or wasn't adapted to meet new standards, this is about evolution (or not in this case). But, if you want to actually be quite stiff, then laws are laws and your chain of action (which is still a chain of bureaucracy to remediate their problems) is valid. Jumping the chain is only done when people (of the high order, or scamming people as I use to say) get something between the blurred lines... And you don't "usually" make money without screwing a bunch of people... If you think that 2 years are plenty, then as I said, I should stop to be a mass consumer and deny money to whatever business asks for my money. Ain't playing it, ain't buying it. So, to be fair... This is not my loss but this is the actual loss of the industry in general which thrive upon bad business practices and consumerism as a trend. I shall stop be a polyvalent tool (which opens a bunch of paths to work on at the same time) and get back to the old human male standard: work it or use it until you fix it or break it, and nothing else until then. And to be even more harsh on the bad habits, class action suit are the only effective way to get a wrong to turn right even after a law doesn't shield you upon the issue that is arising absolutely nothing else.