Ubisoft’s Shocking €92 Million Fine for Secretly Spying on Gamers in Assassin’s Creed and Far Cry—Find Out Why This Scandal Is Rocking the Gaming World! 👇
The gaming industry has been rocked by a seismic scandal as Ubisoft, the French gaming giant behind blockbuster franchises like Assassin’s Creed, Far Cry, and Rainbow Six, faces a staggering €92 million ($104 million) fine for allegedly spying on players. The accusation, lodged by privacy advocacy group noyb (None of Your Business) with Austria’s Data Protection Authority on April 24, 2025, claims Ubisoft has been unlawfully harvesting player data without consent, even in single-player games that require no online functionality. This explosive controversy has sparked outrage among gamers, raised questions about data privacy in the gaming industry, and threatened Ubisoft’s already precarious financial standing. What exactly did Ubisoft do, and why has this issue sent shockwaves through the gaming community? Let’s unpack the details of this unfolding drama.
The Allegations: Spying Through Single-Player Games
At the heart of the controversy is Ubisoft’s practice of requiring internet connections for single-player games like Far Cry Primal and Assassin’s Creed Shadows, which players expect to enjoy offline. According to noyb, this mandatory online requirement allows Ubisoft to collect detailed data on players’ gaming habits—every leap, sword swing, or in-game decision—without explicit permission. A complainant, identified as a tech professional, discovered that Far Cry Primal sent 150 DNS queries to external servers, including those operated by Google, Amazon, and Datadog, in just 10 minutes of gameplay. The encrypted nature of these data transfers made it impossible for players to know what was being shared, raising serious privacy concerns.
Noyb argues that Ubisoft’s actions violate the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), specifically Article 6(1), which requires companies to have a lawful basis for processing personal data. The group contends that Ubisoft’s justifications—vague claims of “improving game experience” and “analytics”—are insufficient under GDPR’s strict standards. “Imagine the Monopoly Man sitting at your table, taking notes on your every move,” said noyb data protection lawyer Joakim Söderberg, likening Ubisoft’s practices to invasive surveillance. Noyb is not only seeking the €92 million fine but also demanding that Ubisoft delete unlawfully collected data and halt unauthorized tracking in the future.
The complaint has resonated with gamers, who have long criticized Ubisoft for forcing online connections in single-player titles. Posts on platforms like Reddit and X have labeled the practice “enshittification,” a term used to describe companies prioritizing profits over user experience. One Reddit user vented, “Forcing single-player games online to spy on us is a new low,” while X posts from users like @Grummz and @SmashJT on April 25, 2025, amplified the outrage, claiming Ubisoft’s actions betray gamers’ trust.
Ubisoft’s Response: Deflection or Denial?
As of April 26, 2025, Ubisoft has not issued a detailed public response to the noyb complaint, though the company’s privacy policy and End User License Agreement (EULA) claim that data collection is necessary for “product improvement” and “security.” Noyb argues these explanations are too vague to meet GDPR requirements, and Ubisoft’s failure to clarify why single-player games require constant online access has only fueled suspicion. When pressed by the complainant, Ubisoft pointed to a hidden offline mode for some titles, contradicting its own assertions that online logins are needed for ownership validation—a claim further undermined by Steam’s existing license verification for purchased games.
This isn’t Ubisoft’s first brush with data privacy issues. In October 2024, a Reddit post accused Ubisoft of sharing user data with Meta without consent, though the claim gained limited traction. A 2023 data breach exposed 900GB of sensitive information, further eroding trust in Ubisoft’s data security practices. The timing of the latest scandal is particularly damaging, as Ubisoft is grappling with financial woes—having lost over half its market value in 2024—and facing potential buyout talks with Tencent and the Guillemot family.
The Context: Ubisoft’s Troubled Year
To fully grasp the significance of this scandal, we must consider Ubisoft’s tumultuous 2024-2025 period. Despite the critical acclaim of Assassin’s Creed Shadows, set in feudal Japan, the company has faced relentless challenges. The Snow White controversy, involving actress Rachel Zegler, indirectly tied Ubisoft to broader cultural debates due to its Disney connections, though it’s unrelated to the gaming division. More directly, Ubisoft’s decision to shut down The Crew’s servers in 2024 sparked backlash, as players lost access to a purchased game, highlighting the risks of always-online models.
Financially, Ubisoft is on shaky ground. The company’s stock plummeted after a series of underperforming titles and the 2023 data breach, making the €92 million fine a potential “gut punch,” as one online report described it. Speculation about a buyout has intensified, with Tencent and the Guillemot Brothers reportedly eyeing control. A hefty fine could weaken Ubisoft’s negotiating position and further depress its stock, which has already been volatile.
The noyb complaint also comes at a time when the gaming industry is under increasing scrutiny for data privacy. Other publishers, like Activision-Blizzard and Electronic Arts, have faced criticism for similar always-online requirements, but Ubisoft’s high-profile franchises and aggressive data practices make it a prime target. If Austria’s Data Protection Authority upholds the fine, it could force Ubisoft to overhaul its data practices and potentially scrap mandatory online connections for single-player games—a move gamers have demanded for years.
The Gamer Backlash: A Community United
The gaming community’s reaction to the allegations has been swift and vocal. On X, posts from influencers like @Vara_Dark and @BoundingComics have framed the scandal as a betrayal of gamers, with hashtags like #UbisoftBusted trending briefly on April 25, 2025. Gamers on Reddit have shared technical analyses, with one user noting that Assassin’s Creed Shadows pings analytics servers even during pause menus, raising questions about the scope of Ubisoft’s tracking. The sentiment is clear: players feel violated by a company they once trusted to deliver immersive, escapist experiences.
This backlash builds on years of frustration with Ubisoft’s business practices. The company’s reliance on microtransactions, buggy launches (like Assassin’s Creed Unity in 2014), and controversial decisions like delisting The Crew have strained its relationship with fans. The data privacy scandal has become a lightning rod for these grievances, with some players calling for boycotts or stricter regulations on the gaming industry.
The Broader Implications: A Wake-Up Call for Gaming
The Ubisoft scandal raises critical questions about data privacy in an increasingly connected gaming landscape. Unlike multiplayer games, which require online infrastructure, single-player titles like Far Cry Primal have no inherent need for constant internet access. Yet, the industry’s shift toward “games as a service” models has normalized invasive data collection, often without transparent consent. Noyb’s complaint could set a precedent, forcing publishers to rethink how they balance monetization with player rights.
Under GDPR, companies can face fines of up to 4% of their annual revenue for violations, which for Ubisoft (with over €2 billion in yearly revenue) could theoretically exceed €80 million. The proposed €92 million fine reflects the severity of the allegations and Ubisoft’s status as a major player. If upheld, it could inspire similar actions against other publishers, as noyb has hinted at targeting additional gaming companies with “questionable practices.”
For Ubisoft, the stakes are existential. A fine of this magnitude, coupled with potential mandates to eliminate always-online requirements, could disrupt its business model, which relies heavily on analytics for in-game monetization and player retention. The company may also face reputational damage, as gamers increasingly prioritize privacy in their purchasing decisions. Some analysts suggest Ubisoft could pivot to more transparent data practices or offer robust offline modes to regain trust, but such changes would require significant investment at a time when the company is financially strained.
The Bigger Picture: Privacy vs. Profit
This scandal underscores a broader tension in the digital age: the conflict between corporate profit motives and individual privacy. Gaming, once a niche hobby, is now a multi-billion-dollar industry where player data is a valuable commodity. Companies like Ubisoft use behavioral tracking to optimize game design, target advertisements, and drive microtransactions, but at what cost? The noyb complaint argues that players deserve control over their data, especially in games marketed as solitary experiences.
The controversy also highlights the power of grassroots advocacy. Noyb, founded by privacy activist Max Schrems, has a track record of challenging tech giants like Meta and Google, and its focus on gaming signals a new frontier in the fight for digital rights. By representing a single complainant—a gamer frustrated by Far Cry Primal’s online requirements—noyb has amplified a niche issue into a global conversation, proving that individual voices can drive systemic change.
What’s Next for Ubisoft?
As of April 26, 2025, the Austrian Data Protection Authority has yet to rule on the noyb complaint, but the case is expected to progress rapidly given GDPR’s streamlined enforcement process. Ubisoft may attempt to settle or contest the allegations, but a guilty verdict could trigger a cascade of consequences, from financial penalties to operational overhauls. Gamers, meanwhile, are watching closely, with some vowing to abandon Ubisoft titles until the company addresses their concerns.
This scandal is a stark reminder of the fragility of trust in the gaming industry. Ubisoft, once a titan of immersive storytelling, now faces a reckoning for practices that many see as exploitative. Whether the company can navigate this crisis—and restore its reputation—remains uncertain, but one thing is clear: the era of unchecked data collection in gaming may be coming to an end, and players are demanding a seat at the table.
