I read a really excellent article once (which I think was about itunes or kindle) about how the modern content delivery business model relies on creating ambiguity between buying and licensing. Like for example, the seller wants to be sure that if you lose your game you have to "buy" it again rather than just prove your identity and continuing license to use, but they can still control what device it goes on and for how long.
So here we have Ubisoft taking away, I presume, some amount of single player downloaded content from people who "bought" it because they don't want to maintain the servers that confirm they continue to be licensed to use it.
Sure, the company needs to control their resource commitments, but this sort of exposes the whole shell game. It would have been smarter of them to just unlock the downloadables when the servers go offline. It would be cheap goodwill.
So here we have Ubisoft taking away, I presume, some amount of single player downloaded content from people who "bought" it because they don't want to maintain the servers that confirm they continue to be licensed to use it.
Sure, the company needs to control their resource commitments, but this sort of exposes the whole shell game. It would have been smarter of them to just unlock the downloadables when the servers go offline. It would be cheap goodwill.