Direct from the horse’s mouth: https://www.ubisoft.com/en-us/help/account/article/closure-of-inactive-ubisoft-accounts/000079595
Edit: The Ubisoft page linked here has almost completely changed in the last day.
Direct from the horse’s mouth: https://www.ubisoft.com/en-us/help/account/article/closure-of-inactive-ubisoft-accounts/000079595
Edit: The Ubisoft page linked here has almost completely changed in the last day.
This is one of the reasons I stopped buying games from steam or the various DRM enabled/account locked stores.
Now I just buy from gog, at least I can have a local backup of all the installers even if they stop providing them for a reason or another. Having to wait or miss out on some games have really lost all meaning.
If they don’t want my money I’ll just use them for something more useful.
EDIT: After re reading this comment it felt like I was astroturfing for the company, but I’ve no affiliation with them, I just like the fact of owning what I buy. I know about the difference of licensing and real owning, but I feel that if I can just use an installer whenever I want it’s a lot closer to owning it.
GOG user here too, they can transfer ownership of deceased’s games over to the next of kin if they have the proper legal docs and will. It’s one of the last DRM-free bastions of PC gaming.
Are you actually downloading all the stuff from GoG locally? I hear this argument often and it is a good one in principle. Until you try to backup a large library. Before I got my Steamdeck I bought a lot from GoG as well and set up a script to backup to my NAS a few times a year. My GoG library is considerably smaller than my Steam library (~60 games vs. ~1.000 games) and it is still taking up multiple TBs on my NAS, even though I’m only backing up windows .exes. If GoG would go under suddenly, I don’t think a lot of people will have their library backed up, nor can back up their library fast and sufficiently enough to make a difference. The true utility of Steam and other online platforms may be their storage capacity.
To be fair, I do not, but I could if I wanted to, and that makes all the difference.
I only keep a copy of the games I enjoyed and I think I will replay and the ones that I plan to play, so - even if for any reason I don’t have access to the net or the service is down - I still can install them.
Someone could say that I could just install them directly, but I put them in a separate, slower, external HDD as installers and occupy my internal drives’ space only when needed.
The only reason I don’t backup them all is that I don’t see, personally, the point in having thousands of installers and tens of TiB of games I know I will not use ever again. But someone could just want to keep them all because they like archiving, or because they are into video game preservation efforts.
And again having the freedom to do so, the choice to do so, is all that really matters.
I would have the ones I cared about, and I’m pretty sure the whole of GoG’s library would suddenly appear in the net, easily accessible, for everyone. Again.
And I would not feel the least moral sting if someone was to retrieve from it a copy of what they’ve already paid, without the need to circumventing protections or modifying software that could be seen, in some jurisdictions, as illegal and without the risks connected to malware disguised as cracks, or the possibility of bugs involuntary introduced by the legit ones.
Point being that it is true that most people will not use the full extent of their freedom, because they don’t care of it or are not interested in it, but having that freedom is the point in itself.
Great post. Even if GOG was to go under, they’ve said before they’d give everyone a heads up before they close. Just like when Playism closed in 2021.