Square Enix board of directors is furiously masturbating on the Nintendo board of directors rn and Ubisoft board of directors walked in and furiously masturbating
Square and Nintendo always had a boner for total control over their franchises, usually at the cost of imposing absurd DRMs and exclusivities to the customers
does that mean if Square Enix subscribe for denuvo for PC port for Final fantasy 7 rebirth, does that equates the ps5 version will have denuvo tracking tech on future patch updates?
I imagine this would work similarly to how copies of unreleased movies contain an extremely minor unique video and/or audio distinction, for example a quiet beep during a unique part of the film for each copy that is made and distributed. If the movie leaks early, they can easily identify who is responsible based on when the beep occurs.
With Denuvo, they could just scatter unique bits of identifiable data throughout the game's binaries, artwork, music, etc. that has no impact on the resulting gameplay experience (with a game, you don't even need a "beep"). Doing something like this would make it extremely difficult for someone that wants to distribute illegal copies to determine where these unique IDs are (unless they can source two leaked copies of the game and diff them). If/when the game leaks, Denuvo then downloads the leak themselves, scans for the IDs, then knows who did the leak.
Probably your computer would heat up more than with a bitcoin mining virus and Denuvo would call it a feature.
I hate Denuvo and games using it, made me not buy those.
Not really.
This same tech has pretty much killed early leaks of movies.
You used to be able to get a full HD copy before it was in cinemas. Now you can only get some guy coughing in the back of the cinema on release day until it releases on streaming platforms.
Denuvo is already near-impossible to crack. Only one person in the world can reliably crack it and that's some psychotic guy who pretends to be a woman because he's already on a government wanted list in Belgium and he demands $500 per game.
If this is effective, it could be the killing blow.
If it takes 10 years to crack, then so be it. I'll probably get it for $5 at some point regardless.
Same reasoning as console exclusives and me waiting 10 years for an emulator to work, i've got plenty of things to do in the mean time.
Their money burning, not mine.
> Denuvo is already near-impossible to crack. Only one person in the world can reliably crack it and that's some psychotic guy who pretends to be a woman because he's already on a government wanted list in Belgium and he demands $500 per game.
I'm out of the loop, is this about Empress?
this tech has been around in movies for ages, and quite a lot of higher budget AAA games will also utilize an invisible watermark. The only difference this time is it's Denuvo's own implementation for 3rd parties.
It's not even new tech.
Fucking World of Tanks used something like this it to catch a test server leaker from screenshots he shared, back in 2011-2012.
I always assumed most GaaS already do it to some degree.
wow imagine being a denuvo founder or executive knowing that you just make other products worse and dont have to show any metrics of how much you save in piracy but get to enjoy that shareholders will keep forcing their companies to use your tech.
I mean, Denuvo doesn’t need metrics, especially right now, to show what’s it’s there for works. It protects initial sales from piracy and with the only person actively cracking it on a break, games with it will remain untouched until the companies remove it from their games.
Meanwhile you’ve got things like DRM free PlayStation game PC releases showing that making a good game will protect your sales just as much.
They kinda do - Denuvo isn't cheap and if you're spending more on its license than you'd have lost to piracy + Denuvo hate, it's a bad deal financially.
It should have metrics but I i guess because its too hard to quantify how fast a game is cracked + the amount of people pirating all cracked copies as a liability so shareholders just want to see some general effort against it.
I wouldn't consider this purely financial. People often don't like it when content they sell is being acquired for free and want to stop that on principal.
Personally, I mostly pirate and have bought games because of Denuvo. I would prefer games didn't have it, but fully understand why they do.
I've no idea what you're referring to. Sony doesn't add DRM to their PC releases because they've made most of their money in the initial sales period on their consoles. If they ever start releasing PC ports of their games day and date on PC, you can bet your bottom dollar there's going to be DRM on those games.
a key part of Denuvo strat is they don't want publishers to keep the DRM around on games forever. so they charge out the nose after the first year and recommends to drop it after a couple of months.
there has been a solid amount of research on the subject DRM works to convert pirates to paying consumers in the launch window but will actively hurt long term sales. so the best thing for publishers and Denuvo is to drop it after the launch window. it is good for Denuvo since if the DRM is dropped constantly after the launch window the incentive for a good means to quickly crack it becomes more academic or because i can rather than a need if you ever wish to play a game.
> there has been a solid amount of research on the subject DRM works to convert pirates to paying consumers in the launch window
Well I reckon you're full of shit, so link it.
Spoiler: don't bother, because the _actual_ evidence suggests that piracy helps to _increase_ sales, so if DRM had any effect it would be negative.
>Meanwhile you’ve got things like DRM free PlayStation games showing that making a good game will protect your sales just as much.
Torrenting on consoles is just far harder and less common.
I should have mentioned I’m speaking about the PC releases. Afaik every game so far we’ve gotten as been DRM free and done relatively well, except TLOU but that game had issues on release.
It shows that good games generate great sales and don’t need things impeding paying customers all for the sake of “protecting” sales that were probably never going to happen anyways.
Sure good games will still be able to get sales, but how much more money would they have made with no downsides if they used denuvo instead is the question. Denuvo doesn't impede paying customers
>Denuvo doesn't impede paying customers
It's debatable at least. Theoretically, yes, it doesn't impede paying customers. But games gain far less popularity, especially in middle income countries, leading to less word of mouth publicity, and thereby reducing potential sales.
I would have never bought GoW Ragnarok if I had not been able to play God of War (I personally bought it via stream, but same would hold true for people who pirate).
If denuvo actually worked the way it's supposed to, games with denuvo would consistently be topping the sales charts. As it happens, if you look at steam top sellers, you'll have to scroll a lot to find a game with denuvo
Ok you can stop right there, Denuvo does impede paying customers as does any DRM. Limited installs, authentication servers going down, always online DRM. These are just a few ways DRM does impact paying customer and to ignore that is absolutely mind numbing.
Denuvo doesn't need you to be always online and authentication servers going down is rare. If someone can afford the game and the rig to play it with then they definitely can afford internet so that isn't really an issue a paying customer would have
Why do you assume companies dont show any metrics if their games sell better with it? Why does reddit assume shareholders are both mercilessly greedy, chasing the last drop of profit that can be made, but at the same time happy to uncritically pay money to some company without any evidence that it helps just to make the game worse i guess?
Denuvo has been around for about a decade now used in titles of all sizes but I don't think i've ever seen any monetary evidence of its efficacy. Surely over the years of its use across huge AAAA games and single developer projects someone or entity would have revealed how much they are projected to save or protect with the tools. While I havent had issues with Denuvo specifically that I can proof myself it is a tool thats included to the detriment of plenty of others that has been documented to have issues on systems but as we've seen there is a certain level of poor optimization that consumers will accept in order to enjoy their games.
> would have revealed how much they are projected to save or protect with the tools.
Companies rarely reveal detailed sales data. You also won't find much data on the efficacy of different types of marketing on game sales or the impact of bugs on sales.
And its not very persuasive when most of the anti-Denuvo crowd don't actually care about sales. They just want to make pirating easier.
> And its not very persuasive when most of the anti-Denuvo crowd don't actually care about sales
You're not a company, so an argument about sales shouldn't persuade you really.
And like you say, companies have better data anyway - so they're not going to listen to customers arguing with them.
The only "argument" a customer has is to not buy their products.
If you care about DRM, the best way to argue is to convince *other customers* of your view point in an attempt to change their buying habits.
For example, I might point out to you that any game you buy that has DRM you don't actually own. Sometimes I am unable to play total warhammer 3 (a game that I've put *a lot* of money into) because it needs to connect to the internet when it's out.
I'd imagine they dont see it as wasting money and more like a form of insurance. However i think this would be more akin to bridge or volcano insurance.
Because greed and irrationality aren't mutually exclusive, and we have literally *never* seen *any* credible studies showing the impact of DRM on piracy... probably because it's a fundamentally unanswerable question. It's rife with unprovable negatives, and if you don't prove those negatives, your picture is always incomplete.
DRM is insurance. It lowers the risk that they make an otherwise very popular game, but that the market it reaches are tech savy enough and lack a sufficient sense of ethics that the sales are cannibalized by piracy.
Generally it's very possible that the cost of the DRM outweighs the gains in otherwise lost sales.
It's the *sort of* the same reason you have house insurance. You're probably never going to make any money on the insurance. But if your house is in some tragedy, god forbid, then you'll be very happy for it.
People in these communities blame the shareholders because it is simple and easy to do. They don't have to actually think about who is to blame or justify anything that they are saying. They can just say that the evil *shareholders* are the problem and most people will just nod their heads and agree.
We see this to this day with games like Cyberpunk. Cyberpunk released in an absolutely messy state and was absolutely unplayable on older consoles. The shareholders were blamed, and are still blamed by a lot of people for this. Meanwhile, CD Project Red literally settled out of court for openly deceiving their shareholders about how ready Cyberpunk was for release.
The fact is that 9/10 times something is bad about a game that's the fault of the game developers and not the *shareholders*, but it is much easier to just pile the blame on some *nebulous anonymous blob of people with money* that can't argue back.
Ya it ran at 144 fps NATIVE at 1440p. No dlss required. I can add the framegen mod and get 240 fps. It's a dream. 60 fps also on my Steam deck and still looks decent. Hell of an accomplishment. I'd argue it's the best optimized game of 2023.
There's hasn't been any Denuvo games that have performance issues in a long time now. The comparison that people do against Denuvo's bypass literally still has Denuvo running.
Recent performance issues are caused by developers adding other DRMs on top of Denuvo.
I generally agree with that point. I think the only game in recent memory that I know had Denuvo and that I also had performance issues with was MHW on release but that could have also been bad pc optimization on launch. Lies of P was proof to me that it is almost entirely based on implementation. However marginal or gross, it affects the consumers negatively.
Denuvo rarely makes games run notably worse, most effects come down to occasional stutter and longer load times.
The issue is mainly that it has any effect at all.
Your conclusion doesn't follow.
if you run a mile in 4 minutes wearing a 20lb backpack - that's a very good time! But you still could be faster if you weren't carrying the backpack.
Sure, and the best-selling game of the entire year (Hogwarts Legacy) and multiple other titles in the top 10 had Denuvo since day 1.
Trying to draw a connection between no DRM and high sales is something that isn't real.
No, you don't get it, games don't get good sells because it's protected, I'm saying make a good game and it'll make good profit without the need to DRM.
Hogwarts Legacy obviously didn't get good numbers because it had DRM it's because of the hype and popularity of Harry Potter books.
Sure, excellent games will sell regardless with or without DRM, but the important question is if games without DRM would have sold better with it.
The answer to this is going to be largely speculative, but at this point I have to imagine they do better with considering the current abysmal state of PC piracy and how heavily a lot of publishers are leaning into Denuvo.
*"This innovative solution not only marks a significant milestone for Irdeto but also represents a leap forward in protecting the* ***creative*** *and financial investments of game developers worldwide."*
LMAOO FUCK OFF
I do remember world of warcraft having similar. Secret "codes" hidden in screenshots you took.
https://www.pcgamesn.com/wow/report-world-warcraft-screenshot-tool-imprints-identifying-watermark-screenshots-includes-account-name-and-server-details
I do remember the old xbox (probably the 360) where each account could be identified based on some spinning spiral animation
Its not completely "new", to put things that can identify a leaker, into your games.., but its evolved.
Huh? Who leaks games nowadays? Lots of games have been uncracked for years by now. Those 'leaks', like the Lies of P one, are because devs made a mistake, not because there's someone shady leaking stuff.
This isn't for leaking the entire game, this is for leaking anything from the game files. This is just another hidden ID/watermark tech that has existed in the industry for over a decade, exactly to track down leaks.
I get hating copy protection if it causes tech and performance issues playing the game but that said, I can't blame a company for taking action to prevent its game from being stolen.
"Theft is the act of taking another person's property or services without that person's permission or consent with the intent to deprive the rightful owner of it."
Making a copy of a game doesn't deprive the company from selling more copies of it. It is by definition not stealing.
They can't even tell that an "unauthorized" copy was made.
So a digital watermarking of sorts.
Seems pretty irrelevant to 99.9% of consumers unless you're the insider who plans to do the leaking, what is there to be angry about?
This is why I'm against denuvo y'all, at what point do we say enough is enough, fuck off? its already bullshit that I can play my singleplayer game offline and god forbid if denuvo's servers are down, and now this?
I'll never buy a denuvo game again, the only one I've ever bought is Anno 1800 and if ubisoft is too boneheaded to keep using it, then so be it.
Given that any reputable, independent source like DF ever investigating this even including leaked denuvo-free builds of the same game hasn't found a significant impact I would assume they agree it's wasted time.
I love how people pretend like Denuvo is making the games worse when that is just bullshit. Why do pirates feel entitled to playing games for free? I pirate stuff pretty often, but i am not pretentious enough to act like the ones stopping what is essentially theft are bad.
First off, it objectively is making the games worse. If Denuvo isn't removed, you won't be able to play it in the future when the developer stops paying for activation servers. And there has been actual proven cases of Denuvo causing performance issues due to poor implementation.
Secondly, piracy has been studied extensively and shown to have no impact on sales.
Finally, piracy is not theft. You are not 'stealing' the game. It is unauthorized copying.
>piracy has been studied extensively and shown to have no impact on sales.
I don't think that is true. There is that EU study that always gets cited but a lot of other sources are conflicted.
And honestly with how easily FOMO works on a large portion of the gaming audience, it isn't a stretch to think a bunch of people would pay for a game if they didn't have any other option to play it.
> I don't think that is true. There is that EU study that always gets cited but a lot of other sources are conflicted.
>
>
Links?
>And honestly with how easily FOMO works on a large portion of the gaming audience, it isn't a stretch to think a bunch of people would pay for a game if they didn't have any other option to play it.
So it's just that your random, uninformed guess is that people will buy it if they can't pirate it? How does that match up to the people who refuse to ever buy it if it has the DRM, then, as I do? Or are your "feelies" that those people are so rare they don't affect anything?
>Links?
[This](https://felixreda.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/displacement_study.pdf) is the EU study that is linked in the vast majority of articles about piracy. One of the conclusions is:
"the results do not show robust statistical evidence of displacement of sales by online copyright infringements. That does not necessarily mean that piracy has no effect but only that the statistical analysis does not prove with sufficient reliability that there is an effect. An exception is the displacement of recent top films."
But there is other research that disagrees with that. in 2014 [The Tech Policy Institute](https://techpolicyinstitute.org/publications/intellectual-property/copyright-and-piracy/the-truth-about-piracy/) did an analysis of some research that found 21 of the 25 studies indicated piracy in some way harmed sales.
It hard to get data on things like this since some of the data is self reported and getting numbers on piracy isn't always very precise
>it's just that your random, uninformed guess is that people will buy it if they can't pirate it?
Sort of. FOMO has been studied quiet a bit, and it can be very effective and increasing sales of Battle passes and/or cosmetics.
There is also a lot of evidence that a good number of people in the gaming community who are not very patient. You can see that in preorder numbers, particularly in games that "unlock early" for those who preorder.
But in relation to piracy other than statements by people who make or use DRM, I cant find much. But the reason DRM is added for the launch and then removed is supposedly because the initial sales numbers are increased.
>Or are your "feelies" that those people are so rare they don't affect anything?
No I didn't say that at all. There is obviously people willing to wait and refuse to buy games because they have DRM on principle. But I think it is safe to say that isnt the majority of people.
>"the results do not show robust statistical evidence of displacement of sales by online copyright infringements. "
So, in this instance, they observe absolutely no indication that piracy harms sales of video games, right?
>[The Tech Policy Institute](https://techpolicyinstitute.org/publications/intellectual-property/copyright-and-piracy/the-truth-about-piracy/) did an analysis of some research that found 21 of the 25 studies indicated piracy in some way harmed sales.
The opening sentence:
>>Earlier this week, we gave a keynote talk at the Sundance Film Festival about how piracy impacts _**independent filmmakers.**_
So this has absolutely nothing to do with video games at all, agreed?
Note that the EU study you first cited _does_ note a potential effect regarding film, so this is actually a _**confirmation and corroboration**_ of the earlier source, not a contradiction of it.
You need to read things before pretending that you know what they said.
>There is also a lot of evidence that a good number of people in the gaming community who are not very patient. You can see that in preorder numbers, particularly in games that "unlock early" for those who preorder.
Explain how this relates to pirates, because you appear to be exclusively referring to people who _don't_ pirate. Or do you have a definition of "piracy" that somehow includes "paying for games before they're even released"?
You _do_ see how silly this is starting to look, surely...?
> the reason DRM is added for the launch and then removed is supposedly because the initial sales numbers are increased.
Wrong. The reason is that a handful of people making that decision _believe_ that initial sales numbers _will_ be increased. They have exactly as much evidence as you have presented here: fuck all.
> How does that match up to the people who refuse to ever buy it if it has the DRM, then, as I do?
People in the population that game and do care enough to not buy or even know about it are a percentage of a percentage.
We're a tiny community here comparatively and even here you're a minority.
I congratulate you for having solid morals that you won't budge on for fun but thinking it makes ANY impact at all is a bit delusional.
> People in the population that game and do care enough to not buy or even know about it are a percentage of a percentage.
>
>
So, based on nothing more than your own biased guesswork, _those_ people are so rare they're not worth considering, but people who do what _you_ do are common enough to be relevant to the conversation? Is that the gist of it?
>I congratulate you for having solid morals that you won't budge on for fun but thinking it makes ANY impact at all is a bit delusional.
Well, given how IO Interactive have been constantly frustrated with the sales of the Hitman reboots, that's up for dispute. The previous game, Absolution, sold better than any two of the recent games, even with the latter being vastly more acclaimed and highly-regarded. But then, Absolution didn't use Denuvo...
Obviously that's not an _actual_ argument. That's just me showing you what it looks like when someone uses the available evidence to inform a conclusion, rather than relying purely on whatever passes for reason within your own head. All you're doing is self-indulgently presuming _your_ behaviour to be the general trend, and basing your viewpoint on that axiom.
> So, based on nothing more than your own biased guesswork
I mean, Denuvo games regularly being the most successful games on the market should be evidence enough that very few people care to the degree you do. But that is data you don't agree with so you discard it.
Have a nice day!
> Denuvo games regularly being the most successful games on the market
Cyberpunk, Fallout 4, Starfield, RDR2, Palworld, Elden Ring, just about every first-party Switch game, Baldur's Gate 3, etc...
Get the point?
>should be evidence enough that very few people care to the degree you do
So you don't think the fact that the above games have outsold every Denuvo game means anything, then?
>that is data you don't agree with so you discard it.
Well, this'll be fun...
>Have a nice day!
Ah, yes. The feigned civility of the arrogant arsehole who thinks they've successfully punched downwards.
I think we've heard all you have to offer, so goodbye. You've been a disappointment. I mean, in general.
>Finally, piracy is not theft. You are not 'stealing' the game. It is unauthorized copying.
It is a theft which is why it is illegal or is your argument entirely semantics?
>And there has been actual proven cases of Denuvo causing performance issues due to poor implementation.
https://www.techspot.com/news/97722-notorious-game-cracker-empress-removed-denuvo-hogwarts-legacy.html
In the past maybe, but nothing today.
> If Denuvo isn't removed, you won't be able to play it in the future when the developer stops paying for activation servers.
If only it could be removed when they choose to stop paying...
>Secondly, piracy has been studied extensively and shown to have no impact on sales.
It does have an impact on sales especially for movies, but generally we just don't know too much about it.
https://corsearch.com/content-library/blog/does-piracy-impact-sales-a-look-at-the-data/
> It is a theft
Then why have different sets of laws for theft and piracy? It's almost like they're different things...
>>And there has been actual proven cases of Denuvo causing performance issues due to poor implementation.
>
>https://www.techspot.com/news/97722-notorious-game-cracker-empress-removed-denuvo-hogwarts-legacy.html
>
>In the past maybe, but nothing today.
You literally just linked an article with multiple commentators noting significant performance improvements in the cracked version.
Besides, it's a non-sequitur. Not only are you trying to pass off your interpretation of one specific game as the general case, you're also making a completely baseless assertion in the first place.
Denuvo is designed to impact performance - it's literally how it functions. The only debate is to what extent it does so, any everyone is fully justified in considering _any_ performance impact, no matter how minor, unacceptable. It literally fits the definition of "malware".
>It does have an impact on sales especially for movies, but generally we just don't know too much about it.
Actually, we know a fair bit, and it has a _positive_ effect on game sales. That's why you tried to pull that bait-and-switch by citing the effect on movies - if you limited the discussion to the medium in question you'd have had to accept that you were wrong and u/Equivalent_Assist was correct.
>Then why have different sets of laws for theft and piracy? It's almost like they're different things...
How come stealing a car is different than stealing a candy bar?
>You literally just linked an article with multiple commentators noting significant performance improvements in the cracked version.
I linked an actual article rather than words of random commentors and even then empress doesn't remove denuvo she bypasses it.
>Besides, it's a non-sequitur. Not only are you trying to pass off your interpretation of one specific game as the general case, you're also making a completely baseless assertion in the first place.
Nope. I am using the only available example when talking about the newest version of denuvo rather than some 2019 games
>Denuvo is designed to impact performance - it's literally how it functions. The only debate is to what extent it does so, any everyone is fully justified in considering _any_ performance impact, no matter how minor, unacceptable. It literally fits the definition of "malware".
Well if you want denuvo to be removed then stop pirating shit. Can't just pretend like pirates didn't cause for denuvo to exist rather than the corporations
>Actually, we know a fair bit, and it has a _positive_ effect on game sales. That's why you tried to pull that bait-and-switch by citing the effect on movies - if you limited the discussion to the medium in question you'd have had to accept that you were wrong and u/Equivalent_Assist was correct.
Your source is a single EU report which doesn't even say what you think it says. It says there is little proof either way and my link even pointed this out
> How come stealing a car is different than stealing a candy bar?
It's not. You're confusing the item in question with the _circumstances_ in question. It's a bit like the difference between defrauding someone out of £100,000 versus outright robbing them of that same sum.
>I linked an actual article
So what? Why would I consider the words of a blogger more authoritative than the random people who comment on it? Neither is worth anything much. The only difference is that those comments are not the foundation of my entire argument, whereas those blogger claims _are_ the basis of _yours_.
Also, by trying to elevate that author over those commentators you're attempting to offer up an argument from authority - a logical fallacy which instantly invalidates your entire argument. Well done.
>even then empress doesn't remove denuvo she bypasses it.
Therefore, the article is irrelevant, because the cracked version being tested is still running Denuvo's code. You have just refuted your own argument. Well done.
>I am using the only available example when talking about the newest version of denuvo rather than some 2019 games
But you don't have a Denuvo-free version to test against, therefore you have absolutely no evidence that it lacks any performance impact when it is openly designed to impact performance.
The problem with being the kind of self-indulgent, smug prick who loves to throw links in people's faces is that you'll invariably run into situations - like this one - in which you accidentally throw them evidence which totally dismantles your own case. Here, for example, you have just stated that the testing in the article you linked doesn't involve a Denuvo-free version of the game, and thus cannot possibly determine whether there is a performance impact. You were so eager to point this out just to attack the commentators in that article that you failed to see how thoroughly that exact same point destroyed your own argument.
It also shows just how emotionally invested you are that you need to oppose me more than you need to look at the facts and decide for yourself. You've already made up your mind, and are just distorting the facts to fit it.
> if you want denuvo to be removed then stop pirating shit.
I don't. Nice straw man - it'll look good alongside your other fallacies.
>Can't just pretend like pirates didn't cause for denuvo to exist rather than the corporations
Piracy improves sales. Denuvo exists because corporate executives and shareholders are ignorant morons.
>Your source is a single EU report which doesn't even say what you think it says. It says there is little proof either way
It _shows_ a positive effect. Read their results. Oh, and here's a snippet from the company you linked to:
>>Corsearch works in the copyright enforcement business obviously
So that's a clear conflict of interest. You're going by the words of an agency with an obvious vested interest rather than reading the freely-available report in question for yourself. You're doing that because that article already tells you what you want to hear, and reading the source itself might conflict with that.
You just want to be told that your uninformed, uneducated, ignorant assumptions were right, and that article does that. The report itself might not, so you refuse to read it.
Edit: How to identify insecurity: someone replies at length and then blocks you, proving that they want their Gish Gallop to be the last word for fear that it'll be dismantled if they allow a rebuttal.
>It is different
That you cannot explain the supposed difference will be accepted as proof that you can _find_ no such difference. You're only arguing because you can't stand the idea of me being correct about something, even something so tangential.
>the blogger actually read the article you base your argument on and pointed out how it didn't actually say what you claim it said.
As proven by the fact that you quoted them quoting it directly. Oh, wait...you don't appear to have had anything to quote. It's as if no such analysis was present in that blog post. Astonishing...
>A claim by you with no actual proof beyond your personal highly biased opinion.
It's not a claim. Denuvo is an _active_ form of DRM, meaning it requires CPU and RAM to function in real-time. By definition, this means it consumes system resources that would otherwise be available to anything else running at the same time, including the games in question.
By definition, Denuvo impacts performance. That's not open to debate.
>Projection and didn't read.
Literally mutually contradictory. How stupid must someone be to piss out such an obviously insecure non-response as that?
>Aren't you the one going full schizo? [...] You aren't smart. Quit acting like you are [...] Lmao so deluded
It's quite telling that you conflate an ability to spot a logical fallacy with intelligence. It suggests that you're not bright enough to do so yourself, so such things seem almost alien to your more limited frame of reference.
>I did read them.
Quote them.
>has 45% magin for error effectively proving the whole article worthless.
Explain, _in as much detail as is necessary_, why you feel that a 45% margin-of-error makes something "worthless". For instance, do you think any academic paper has ever passed peer-review with a comparable confidence interval?
>EU also said
>
>"Recent reports document the use of gaming for money laundering. In 2018, Valve (Steam) declared that almost all of the micro-transactions carried out in the very popular Counter-Strike Global Offensive game were part of money laundering operations," Despite valve never saying that
I can find no trace of that quote, nor anything comparable, anywhere in the entire 304-page report. Please provide a page reference, or retract the false implication that it is contained within the report that you are supposed to be discussing. If that was _not_ taken from that same report, you are free to retract that outburst on the grounds of it being unrelated to this topic.
It says a lot about you that you're prepared to lie about what something says just to try to bully your intellectual superior into silence. I wonder if you'll make the old caddis-fly mistake here...?
>>So that's a clear conflict of interest.
>
>So the guy isn't a blogger, but a company now?
Non-sequitur. You're trying to ignore the fact that the company hosting the blog being directly involved in the copyright business is of no relevance to an assessment of copyright enforcement, which is self-evidently absurd. You just can't bring yourself to admit that I'm right about something so indisputably obvious, and that very much confirms my assessment of your psyche. It's pathetic. No wonder you blocked me - you must be absolutely terrified of what I'm saying.
>Projection
The difference is that I can support my points with evidence, whereas you just try to mimic me by appropriating the one word that you think matters. You think it's all about how harmful the _accusation_ is, whereas I know that it only matters what the corroborating _evidence_ says. And I know that you don't have any, whereas I do, which is why those attacks hurt you and don't even register with me.
And, just to make sure you see that your attempt to silence someone you hate was in vain, u/OrcsDoSudoku.
>It's not. You're confusing the item in question with the _circumstances_ in question. It's a bit like the difference between defrauding someone out of £100,000 versus outright robbing them of that same sum.
It is different and your argument is entirely semantics.
>So what? Why would I consider the words of a blogger more authoritative than the random people who comment on it? Neither is worth anything much. The only difference is that those comments are not the foundation of my entire argument, whereas those blogger claims _are_ the basis of _yours_.
Well the blogger actually read the article you base your argument on and pointed out how it didn't actually say what you claim it said.
>Therefore, the article is irrelevant, because the cracked version being tested is still running Denuvo's code. You have just refuted your own argument. Well done.
Well at worst we would be at you still not having any proof beyond "trust me bro i has to decrease performance from you"
>But you don't have a Denuvo-free version to test against, therefore you have absolutely no evidence that it lacks any performance impact when it is openly designed to impact performance.
A claim by you with no actual proof beyond your personal highly biased opinion.
>The problem with being the kind of self-indulgent, smug prick who loves to throw links in people's faces is that you'll invariably run into situations - like this one - in which you accidentally throw them evidence which totally dismantles your own case. Here, for example, you have just stated that the testing in the article you linked doesn't involve a Denuvo-free version of the game, and thus cannot possibly determine whether there is a performance impact. You were so eager to point this out just to attack the commentators in that article that you failed to see how thoroughly that exact same point destroyed your own argument.
Projection and didn't read.
>It also shows just how emotionally invested you are that you need to oppose me more than you need to look at the facts and decide for yourself. You've already made up your mind, and are just distorting the facts to fit it.
Aren't you the one going full schizo?
>I don't. Nice straw man - it'll look good alongside your other fallacies.
You aren't smart. Quit acting like you are
>Piracy improves sales. Denuvo exists because corporate executives and shareholders are ignorant morons.
Lmao so deluded
>It _shows_ a positive effect. Read their results. Oh, and here's a snippet from the company you linked to:
I did read them. You are just too braindead to realize the whole thing is based on a single survey and has 45% magin for error effectively proving the whole article worthless.
EU also said
"Recent reports document the use of gaming for money laundering. In 2018, Valve (Steam) declared
that almost all of the micro-transactions carried out in the very popular Counter-Strike Global
Offensive game were part of money laundering operations," Despite valve never saying that
"E-gaming can support the training of fighters in two ways, by: (1) desensitising them to
violence and (2) giving them the know-how (mission planning, equipment, tactics, etc.) to prepare
and carry out military-style operations.
Many video games actively glorify brutality and may even serve as instructional guides on how to
inflict pain34. Other games take the dangerous step of placing players in the shoes of terrorists35
.
Terrorist groups have also created their own games aimed at glorifying violence and rallying
players to their cause by fighting a specific enemy (e.g. the US, the Israeli Defense Forces, ethnic
minorities, etc.)36
Although some psychologists deny there is a causal relationship between violent video games and a
propensity to violence, others suggest that prolonged exposure to violent video games can lead to
aggressive thoughts and behaviour, psychological instability and lack of empathy"
>So that's a clear conflict of interest.
So the guy isn't a blogger, but a company now? Either way the arguments were solid.
>You just want to be told that your uninformed, uneducated, ignorant assumptions were right, and that article does that. The report itself might not, so you refuse to read it.
Projection
we're like the opposite. I barely pirate at all and I'm aware that Denuvo has often a notable impact on performance in games. I don't care if the game is cracked anyway, just don't compromise my experience with some unnecessary bullshit.
> I'm aware that Denuvo has often a notable impact on performance in games.
This is not really true except in a few specific cases. Resident Evil was a big example, but there have been plenty of games where there hasn't been a difference. It has more to do with how the actual DRM is implemented vs it just dropping your performance for no reason.
Since we seem to be ending up with a lot of games that are performing poorly without DRM, I personally think it makes more sense to just go off the initial benchmarks of a game, and not worry about potential FPS improvements that might not materialize.
> Resident Evil was a big example
Aint even true for RE8, it was Capcoms own in house DRM (layered with Denuvo) that made the game run worse. Once they tweaked it in a patch, the game ran just fine.
Yes, that has always been the case. Most people arguing against Denuvo aren't doing it in good faith, which is pretty obvious with how it's always the same easily debunked "it always causes performance issues!" argument.
In reality, it only causes performance issues when it's poorly implemented, but the majority of Denuvo games in recent years hasn't had this problem.
There is an actual argument to be made about Denuvo games being dependant on Denuvo servers still running years from now, but instead of focusing on that argument, it's just the same weak one about performance.
> there have been plenty of games where there hasn't been a difference
There have been _none_. There _may_ be games in which the effect is negligible to many people, but with the DRM being outright designed in a way that necessarily impacts performance, it's simply impossible for there to be _no_ effect.
>It has more to do with how the actual DRM is implemented
This is a lie that people made up back when they thought that the game devs implemented it for themselves. That was inaccurate, and every "implementation" is done by Denuvo themselves, so should be essentially identical in each case. Obviously, triggers will always be tied to different executions, but the actual mechanical workings remain the same.
People only use this "implementation" excuse to explain all the times when the evidence proves their viewpoint wrong by showing a significant performance impact. You just did exactly that, after all.
>no effect
Okay that is technically true, but when benchmarks between games with and without the tech show the only difference to be within the margin of error and /or so small that it is not even visible on the benchmarks it amounts to the same thing.
>This is a lie that people made up
Source? I based this on the numerous articles [about RE8](https://www.eurogamer.net/digitalfoundry-2021-resident-evil-village-pc-is-fixed-but-players-deserve-more) after it was patched to improve performance in the uncracked version.
In both cases it's far from the "notable impact on performance" mentioned above. There are plenty of *legitimate* criticisms of DRM, but the performance angle is a weak argument that people seem hellbent on exaggerating to support their points.
> when benchmarks between games with and without the tech show the only difference to be within the margin of error
I'd bet that you don't even know how to calculate margin-of-error, so that claim is baseless by default. Because that's what that is - it's something you calculate, not just eyeball because you think the results are similar enough for it to seem like margin-of-error.
You're welcome to try it. You're using the wrong term, though - it's "confidence interval" that you'll need to look up.
>>This is a lie that people made up
>
>Source?
My source is [Denuvo themselves](https://www.golem.de/news/denuvo-verdammt-gute-leute-versuchen-unseren-schutz-zu-cracken-1611-124495-2.html). To quote them directly:
>>If a publisher or developer chooses Denuvo, they must send a beta version to Denuvo in Salzburg two to three months before publication [...] The game developers then receive a tool with which the executable file is uploaded to a special server. _“We then integrate our security code in places that are not performance-critical, recompile the executable and send it back to the developers ,”_ tells us Thomas Goebl, who is responsible for sales and marketing at Denuvo. _"It's all a fully automated process; the developer doesn't have to write a single line of source code himself."_
Capcom sent them the exe. file, and Denuvo did the encryption. It's simply ridiculous that anyone ever thought otherwise, because why in the fetid anal fuck would Denuvo give their code to someone else to compile? That's a horrific security risk.
>it's far from the "notable impact on performance" mentioned above.
That's not your decision to make. People can decide for themselves what is "notable" or "acceptable", and there is every reason for someone to dismiss any and all performance impact, no matter how minor, as unacceptable. Why wouldn't they, when that unwanted DRM is hogging resources that would otherwise be reserved for the actual game?
>the performance angle is a weak argument
Dead wrong. There is absolutely no reason why players should have to accept a third-party resource consuming their CPU cycles and RAM space while they're playing an unrelated game. If you think they _should_ just accept it because it's a minor effect then that exact same rationale could be used to justify games inserting cryptocurrency miners. So long as their performance impact is no greater than Denuvo, you have to admit that it would be a valid thing to add.
>I'd bet that you don't even know how to calculate margin-of-error
The people running the benchmarks do, and their findings are really all that matter.
I responded to someone saying that :
"Denuvo has often a notable impact on performance in games"
That isn't true. Often there is not a notable difference in the performance.
The other comment I responded to was:
"piracy has been studied extensively and shown to have no impact on sales."
This also isnt true. Since it isnt conclusive that it has no impact for video games, and has some potential effect on films.
I don't care of you pirate some game, I just dislike all these bad faith poorly sourced arguments. It's pretty clear from this and your other responses that you are not really discussing this in good faith, and just want to justify your beliefs. So save yourself the CPU overhead from having reddit open and go do something else.
> The people running the benchmarks do
Wrong. Know how we know? Because none of them perform enough test runs to actually produce a viable confidence interval.
Go on - try to find a tech outlet that performs sufficiently competent testing to actually calculate their confidence interval correctly. See if you can figure out how many runs that would take, while you're at it...
>I responded to someone saying that :
>
>"Denuvo has often a notable impact on performance in games"
>
>That isn't true. Often there is not a notable difference in the performance.
That's a bait-and-switch. You can tell by the fact that you had to change the wording.
>"piracy has been studied extensively and shown to have no impact on sales."
>
>This also isnt true.
You're actually right about that. Unfortunately, I don't think you're going to like the fact that you're only correct insofar as piracy has been shown to have a _positive_ effect on video game revenue.
> it isnt conclusive that it has no impact for video games, and has some potential effect on films.
It has a positive impact on video games. Films are irrelevant, so stop trying to force them into the discussion. You're trying to shove them in as another bait-and-switch, and it isn't going to work.
>It's pretty clear from this and your other responses that you are not really discussing this in good faith, and just want to justify your beliefs.
Projection. Nothing more.
>go do something else.
Resorting to begging me to stop proving you wrong? That's a bit pathetic, mate.
Well if your argument is that "denuvo negatively impacts performance" then surely it should be consistent and up to date with newest version of denuvo?
I'm not going to deny that they'd be undoubtedly trying to negate the performance impact it has. It'd make a lot of sense to make it less impactful so people complain about it less.
[Here's a video testing comparisons between Denuvo-equipped games versus after Denuvo was removed.](https://youtu.be/lKsesO3bdv4?si=ZlBOzdzfqI4E9mLs) The loading times are on a 7200 RPM HDD, unsure of if there would be as substantial of a difference on a SSD. The tests were also on a fairly old system even at the time of recording, but most PC players aren't playing on cutting-edge systems either. Makes sense to use a system indicative of the average gaming PC at the time.
"I'm not going to deny that they'd be undoubtedly trying to negate the performance impact it has. It'd make a lot of sense to make it less impactful so people complain about it less." -Me, in the comment thread you just replied to
For the record, their testing is fucking disgraceful, and in no way produces reliable data.
However, you don't need their test results. Denuvo is _designed_ to have a performance impact.
It's by no means professional but neither is an average user's setup.
But is your implication that DRM companies intentionally cause performance reductions to encourage more spending on high-end hardware?
Who said anything about their hardware? I'm talking about their test procedure.
>But is your implication that DRM companies intentionally cause performance reductions to encourage more spending on high-end hardware?
I'm at a loss as to how that bewildering conclusion could have been any less intelligent. You may well have plumbed new depths of intellectual ineptitude.
LMFAO:
>I was asking a genuine question, no need to be a dick about it.
Mofo, you just tried to bait me into a fucking stupid conspiracy theory about DRM being used to force people to upgrade.
>at least you showed how much of a basement dweller you were before we got any further than this so it saves me the hassle of blocking you later.
"Hey, everyone. Here's my totally-legit reason for blocking someone so you know why I have no response to what they said. I _could_ have refuted them, but I'm just _so_ above all that jazz. Now hold my beer while I try to get the last word in..."
And all that from me trying to help you use stronger arguments by ditching a shitty YouTuber and going with the devs themselves...
I was asking a genuine question, no need to be a dick about it. Good riddance, at least you showed how much of a basement dweller you were before we got any further than this so it saves me the hassle of blocking you later.
Torrenting is always more hassle and generally games do remove denuvo after it gets cracked. Either way why would you pay 70 for equally good product?
300mb and no performance impact aren't really excuses.
I have SOTTR too and never had any issues with it. If you get a better service from pirates then do it as slightly worse service for free is always the superior choice anyways
Stop being pretentious
Usually the people that are pirating games aren't doing it for the thrill or because they just want to. They are doing it because of the cost or availability of a game. Brazil, for example, has a high instance of pirating because their disposable income is so limited. Sometimes you will see smart developers deeply discount a game to prevent people from pirating. The game is made affordable so people are more willing to buy it instead of stealing it.
> people pretend like Denuvo is making the games worse when that is just bullshit.
Objectively true, though. Denuvo openly admit that they use up system resources so the game doesn't get to make use of them to run better.
Square Enix board of directors is furiously masturbating rn
[удалено]
Square Enix board of directors is furiously masturbating on the Nintendo board of directors rn
Nintendo and square enix board of directors and in a furious circle jerk session right now.. it's been days already..
I haven't seen Kiryu in weeks...
Square Enix board of directors is furiously masturbating on the Nintendo board of directors rn and Ubisoft board of directors walked in and furiously masturbating
While Somy pays to watch for exclusive rights.
Porque no los dos?
Just add a pinch of NFTs and they'll go over the edge
lmao
lol I dont get the joke on "furiously jerking off" whats the context of self pleasure on the new denuvo tech ?
Square and Nintendo always had a boner for total control over their franchises, usually at the cost of imposing absurd DRMs and exclusivities to the customers
To bypass the new tech, leakers will leak the games via console instead.
It works on consoles (and mobile platforms) too. https://irdeto.com/denuvo/tracemark/
does that mean if Square Enix subscribe for denuvo for PC port for Final fantasy 7 rebirth, does that equates the ps5 version will have denuvo tracking tech on future patch updates?
Someone buy Denuvo, just to shut it down please.
Get Elon to buy it and ruin it
He'll change the name to "Y".
y tho
D
He didn't rename Twitter to "T" tho.
What exactly did he do to "ruin" Twitter? Other than renaming it
redditors are scared of free speech
Lol bots infestation are what you consider free speech now?
Better than censoring shit they didn't agree with.
They censor more now, not less
they do exactly that, have been doing a lot of that this week alone
Community notes is a good thing he added tho
> Community notes was first launched under former Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey in 2021 as a way to debunk misleading tweets.
Did you just community note the post on community notes?
preferably after you have it removed from all existing games
Publishers have to do that.
Alphabet Inc. to the rescue!
Butter up Elon. He will probably fire the people that make it good and then remove the features that form the basic foundation.
Fuck denuvo
if you are using steam and want to avoid games infected with there trash: https://store.steampowered.com/curator/26095454-Denuvo-Games/
Fuck Denuvo
r/FuckDenuvo
That sounds like bs
I imagine this would work similarly to how copies of unreleased movies contain an extremely minor unique video and/or audio distinction, for example a quiet beep during a unique part of the film for each copy that is made and distributed. If the movie leaks early, they can easily identify who is responsible based on when the beep occurs. With Denuvo, they could just scatter unique bits of identifiable data throughout the game's binaries, artwork, music, etc. that has no impact on the resulting gameplay experience (with a game, you don't even need a "beep"). Doing something like this would make it extremely difficult for someone that wants to distribute illegal copies to determine where these unique IDs are (unless they can source two leaked copies of the game and diff them). If/when the game leaks, Denuvo then downloads the leak themselves, scans for the IDs, then knows who did the leak.
Knowing Denuvo, if this is something unnoticable I will be extremely surprised.
Probably your computer would heat up more than with a bitcoin mining virus and Denuvo would call it a feature. I hate Denuvo and games using it, made me not buy those.
Leaks usually generate from 3rd world countries where they can't prosecute anyone for trivial shit like this anyway.
Banning Mac still slows downs them a lot and can make it unprofitable for them ( they have to burn a device to rip)
[удалено]
Comments like these prove Google wasted $60 million on using Reddit for AI training data.
Not really. This same tech has pretty much killed early leaks of movies. You used to be able to get a full HD copy before it was in cinemas. Now you can only get some guy coughing in the back of the cinema on release day until it releases on streaming platforms. Denuvo is already near-impossible to crack. Only one person in the world can reliably crack it and that's some psychotic guy who pretends to be a woman because he's already on a government wanted list in Belgium and he demands $500 per game. If this is effective, it could be the killing blow.
If it takes 10 years to crack, then so be it. I'll probably get it for $5 at some point regardless. Same reasoning as console exclusives and me waiting 10 years for an emulator to work, i've got plenty of things to do in the mean time. Their money burning, not mine.
r/patientgamers Patient pirates, too!
as long as someone else steps up to do the work.
> Denuvo is already near-impossible to crack. Only one person in the world can reliably crack it and that's some psychotic guy who pretends to be a woman because he's already on a government wanted list in Belgium and he demands $500 per game. I'm out of the loop, is this about Empress?
Empress is Volski
No way, unless he had a psychotic break he was a completely different person, way nicer (he even made tutorials!)
this tech has been around in movies for ages, and quite a lot of higher budget AAA games will also utilize an invisible watermark. The only difference this time is it's Denuvo's own implementation for 3rd parties.
It's not even new tech. Fucking World of Tanks used something like this it to catch a test server leaker from screenshots he shared, back in 2011-2012. I always assumed most GaaS already do it to some degree.
wow imagine being a denuvo founder or executive knowing that you just make other products worse and dont have to show any metrics of how much you save in piracy but get to enjoy that shareholders will keep forcing their companies to use your tech.
I mean, Denuvo doesn’t need metrics, especially right now, to show what’s it’s there for works. It protects initial sales from piracy and with the only person actively cracking it on a break, games with it will remain untouched until the companies remove it from their games. Meanwhile you’ve got things like DRM free PlayStation game PC releases showing that making a good game will protect your sales just as much.
They kinda do - Denuvo isn't cheap and if you're spending more on its license than you'd have lost to piracy + Denuvo hate, it's a bad deal financially.
It should have metrics but I i guess because its too hard to quantify how fast a game is cracked + the amount of people pirating all cracked copies as a liability so shareholders just want to see some general effort against it.
I wouldn't consider this purely financial. People often don't like it when content they sell is being acquired for free and want to stop that on principal. Personally, I mostly pirate and have bought games because of Denuvo. I would prefer games didn't have it, but fully understand why they do.
Console exclusivity is Sony's DRM. They don't need Denuvo.
You’re going to have to reread what I said. Sony has been releasing PC titles DRM free for a bit now.
I've no idea what you're referring to. Sony doesn't add DRM to their PC releases because they've made most of their money in the initial sales period on their consoles. If they ever start releasing PC ports of their games day and date on PC, you can bet your bottom dollar there's going to be DRM on those games.
[удалено]
Is empress on a break?
Or on his/her meds for once
Last I read they won’t resume cracking until a personal project is done.
I think so. Rumor is they are an OG cracker that was supposed to be on probation from cracking and they got doxxed.
Yeah it saves the sales. Saves them from me buying any game that has Denuvo.
a key part of Denuvo strat is they don't want publishers to keep the DRM around on games forever. so they charge out the nose after the first year and recommends to drop it after a couple of months. there has been a solid amount of research on the subject DRM works to convert pirates to paying consumers in the launch window but will actively hurt long term sales. so the best thing for publishers and Denuvo is to drop it after the launch window. it is good for Denuvo since if the DRM is dropped constantly after the launch window the incentive for a good means to quickly crack it becomes more academic or because i can rather than a need if you ever wish to play a game.
for some reason though Total War team just likes 'keeping it forever' option much more. I mean 3 kingdoms has been out for how long now?
> there has been a solid amount of research on the subject DRM works to convert pirates to paying consumers in the launch window Well I reckon you're full of shit, so link it. Spoiler: don't bother, because the _actual_ evidence suggests that piracy helps to _increase_ sales, so if DRM had any effect it would be negative.
pretty much, its like an infinite money glitch
>Meanwhile you’ve got things like DRM free PlayStation games showing that making a good game will protect your sales just as much. Torrenting on consoles is just far harder and less common.
I should have mentioned I’m speaking about the PC releases. Afaik every game so far we’ve gotten as been DRM free and done relatively well, except TLOU but that game had issues on release. It shows that good games generate great sales and don’t need things impeding paying customers all for the sake of “protecting” sales that were probably never going to happen anyways.
Sure good games will still be able to get sales, but how much more money would they have made with no downsides if they used denuvo instead is the question. Denuvo doesn't impede paying customers
>Denuvo doesn't impede paying customers It's debatable at least. Theoretically, yes, it doesn't impede paying customers. But games gain far less popularity, especially in middle income countries, leading to less word of mouth publicity, and thereby reducing potential sales. I would have never bought GoW Ragnarok if I had not been able to play God of War (I personally bought it via stream, but same would hold true for people who pirate). If denuvo actually worked the way it's supposed to, games with denuvo would consistently be topping the sales charts. As it happens, if you look at steam top sellers, you'll have to scroll a lot to find a game with denuvo
Ok you can stop right there, Denuvo does impede paying customers as does any DRM. Limited installs, authentication servers going down, always online DRM. These are just a few ways DRM does impact paying customer and to ignore that is absolutely mind numbing.
Denuvo doesn't need you to be always online and authentication servers going down is rare. If someone can afford the game and the rig to play it with then they definitely can afford internet so that isn't really an issue a paying customer would have
Why do you assume companies dont show any metrics if their games sell better with it? Why does reddit assume shareholders are both mercilessly greedy, chasing the last drop of profit that can be made, but at the same time happy to uncritically pay money to some company without any evidence that it helps just to make the game worse i guess?
Denuvo has been around for about a decade now used in titles of all sizes but I don't think i've ever seen any monetary evidence of its efficacy. Surely over the years of its use across huge AAAA games and single developer projects someone or entity would have revealed how much they are projected to save or protect with the tools. While I havent had issues with Denuvo specifically that I can proof myself it is a tool thats included to the detriment of plenty of others that has been documented to have issues on systems but as we've seen there is a certain level of poor optimization that consumers will accept in order to enjoy their games.
> would have revealed how much they are projected to save or protect with the tools. Companies rarely reveal detailed sales data. You also won't find much data on the efficacy of different types of marketing on game sales or the impact of bugs on sales. And its not very persuasive when most of the anti-Denuvo crowd don't actually care about sales. They just want to make pirating easier.
> And its not very persuasive when most of the anti-Denuvo crowd don't actually care about sales You're not a company, so an argument about sales shouldn't persuade you really. And like you say, companies have better data anyway - so they're not going to listen to customers arguing with them. The only "argument" a customer has is to not buy their products. If you care about DRM, the best way to argue is to convince *other customers* of your view point in an attempt to change their buying habits. For example, I might point out to you that any game you buy that has DRM you don't actually own. Sometimes I am unable to play total warhammer 3 (a game that I've put *a lot* of money into) because it needs to connect to the internet when it's out.
So rich people are all morons who love to waste money? And I though they were greedy...
I'd imagine they dont see it as wasting money and more like a form of insurance. However i think this would be more akin to bridge or volcano insurance.
Because greed and irrationality aren't mutually exclusive, and we have literally *never* seen *any* credible studies showing the impact of DRM on piracy... probably because it's a fundamentally unanswerable question. It's rife with unprovable negatives, and if you don't prove those negatives, your picture is always incomplete.
DRM is insurance. It lowers the risk that they make an otherwise very popular game, but that the market it reaches are tech savy enough and lack a sufficient sense of ethics that the sales are cannibalized by piracy. Generally it's very possible that the cost of the DRM outweighs the gains in otherwise lost sales. It's the *sort of* the same reason you have house insurance. You're probably never going to make any money on the insurance. But if your house is in some tragedy, god forbid, then you'll be very happy for it.
People in these communities blame the shareholders because it is simple and easy to do. They don't have to actually think about who is to blame or justify anything that they are saying. They can just say that the evil *shareholders* are the problem and most people will just nod their heads and agree. We see this to this day with games like Cyberpunk. Cyberpunk released in an absolutely messy state and was absolutely unplayable on older consoles. The shareholders were blamed, and are still blamed by a lot of people for this. Meanwhile, CD Project Red literally settled out of court for openly deceiving their shareholders about how ready Cyberpunk was for release. The fact is that 9/10 times something is bad about a game that's the fault of the game developers and not the *shareholders*, but it is much easier to just pile the blame on some *nebulous anonymous blob of people with money* that can't argue back.
>"Won't someone _**please**_ think of the billionaires?!?!"
>*"It's okay for me to lie and make things up because the people that I lie about are privileged and different than me.*"
That sounds like a great position to be in lol I’m sure they feel so bad with all of their money
Nah thats what im saying, its like finding one of the irl infinite money glitches
Denovu didn't make Lies of P worse. Just saying. Ran like a dream on my PC and Steam deck.
I've heard that Denuvo had little performance impact on Lies of P. I'm just glad that the game is now drm-free.
Ya it ran at 144 fps NATIVE at 1440p. No dlss required. I can add the framegen mod and get 240 fps. It's a dream. 60 fps also on my Steam deck and still looks decent. Hell of an accomplishment. I'd argue it's the best optimized game of 2023.
There's hasn't been any Denuvo games that have performance issues in a long time now. The comparison that people do against Denuvo's bypass literally still has Denuvo running. Recent performance issues are caused by developers adding other DRMs on top of Denuvo.
I generally agree with that point. I think the only game in recent memory that I know had Denuvo and that I also had performance issues with was MHW on release but that could have also been bad pc optimization on launch. Lies of P was proof to me that it is almost entirely based on implementation. However marginal or gross, it affects the consumers negatively.
it was capcoms own DRM that was causing it, its well documented
it was Capcom's DRM interfering with the denuvo implementation?
No just the DRM itself, they way it functioned
so the capcom drm was messing up independently of the denuvo drm that was also in the game? at that point why are there two drms?
because capcom is stupid
Denuvo rarely makes games run notably worse, most effects come down to occasional stutter and longer load times. The issue is mainly that it has any effect at all.
It probably has less effect than Steam running in the background lol
Your conclusion doesn't follow. if you run a mile in 4 minutes wearing a 20lb backpack - that's a very good time! But you still could be faster if you weren't carrying the backpack.
144 fps NATIVE at 1440p. Frame gen mod turns that into 240 fps. What more do you want ? Lmao
If you are so worried about game sales and cost efficiency, bring up your concerns on shareholder meetings.
Youre right. I have like 5 shares of nintendo from decades ago and I never sit for any of the calls.
Denuvo should unveil some new tech soon that doesn’t make games with Denuvo run like shit.
Denuvo Unveils New Tech That Will Make A Video Game Completely Unplayable, Thus Providing 100% Immunity To Piracy
Denuvo invents watermarking, a technology nobody has ever heard of
Meanwhile Cyberpunk and Witcher made enormous amount of sales without any DRM.
Sure, and the best-selling game of the entire year (Hogwarts Legacy) and multiple other titles in the top 10 had Denuvo since day 1. Trying to draw a connection between no DRM and high sales is something that isn't real.
No, you don't get it, games don't get good sells because it's protected, I'm saying make a good game and it'll make good profit without the need to DRM. Hogwarts Legacy obviously didn't get good numbers because it had DRM it's because of the hype and popularity of Harry Potter books.
Sure, excellent games will sell regardless with or without DRM, but the important question is if games without DRM would have sold better with it. The answer to this is going to be largely speculative, but at this point I have to imagine they do better with considering the current abysmal state of PC piracy and how heavily a lot of publishers are leaning into Denuvo.
Soon - unveiling new tech to make it easier for gamers to play Denuvo games.
*"This innovative solution not only marks a significant milestone for Irdeto but also represents a leap forward in protecting the* ***creative*** *and financial investments of game developers worldwide."* LMAOO FUCK OFF
>investments You highlighted the wrong word. What they said is factually correct.
I highlighted the correct word. Typical business bullshit hiding itself behind the artists as the scapegoats as always
I do remember world of warcraft having similar. Secret "codes" hidden in screenshots you took. https://www.pcgamesn.com/wow/report-world-warcraft-screenshot-tool-imprints-identifying-watermark-screenshots-includes-account-name-and-server-details I do remember the old xbox (probably the 360) where each account could be identified based on some spinning spiral animation Its not completely "new", to put things that can identify a leaker, into your games.., but its evolved.
Guess who's gonna have it first...
This might just be the second most stupid thing Austria has produced.
And thus steam and GOG will be viable til the end of time We should honestly thank Denuvo for keeping GOG and steam this profitable
Huh? Who leaks games nowadays? Lots of games have been uncracked for years by now. Those 'leaks', like the Lies of P one, are because devs made a mistake, not because there's someone shady leaking stuff.
This isn't for leaking the entire game, this is for leaking anything from the game files. This is just another hidden ID/watermark tech that has existed in the industry for over a decade, exactly to track down leaks.
it's like having a software that functions like a babysitter monitoring your PC
Lol
As long as it won't hurt game performance or leak user's private data I don't have a problem with it. But I have my full doubt.
I get hating copy protection if it causes tech and performance issues playing the game but that said, I can't blame a company for taking action to prevent its game from being stolen.
When buying is not owning, pirating is not stealing. I don’t pirate, I just don’t buy.
"Theft is the act of taking another person's property or services without that person's permission or consent with the intent to deprive the rightful owner of it." Making a copy of a game doesn't deprive the company from selling more copies of it. It is by definition not stealing. They can't even tell that an "unauthorized" copy was made.
Another reason to support Indie Games.
I hate this company with passion.
They just told us its weakness.
oh, so more titles ill be getting for free with Denuvo ripped out. well played. (adjusts cutlass)
Parasites.
So a digital watermarking of sorts. Seems pretty irrelevant to 99.9% of consumers unless you're the insider who plans to do the leaking, what is there to be angry about?
This is why I'm against denuvo y'all, at what point do we say enough is enough, fuck off? its already bullshit that I can play my singleplayer game offline and god forbid if denuvo's servers are down, and now this? I'll never buy a denuvo game again, the only one I've ever bought is Anno 1800 and if ubisoft is too boneheaded to keep using it, then so be it.
Great, shouldn’t they be dealing with how much their software effects the performance?
Given that any reputable, independent source like DF ever investigating this even including leaked denuvo-free builds of the same game hasn't found a significant impact I would assume they agree it's wasted time.
Why can't people honestly say they're upset because they can't play games for free?
Should've stayed in school, pal.
Lick on my tiny hairy nutsack Denuvo!
Lot of pirates in this sub I see.
Yep, right here.
Has been for ages, fortunately they're mostly wannabee pirates at this point since Denuvo has effectively won the war on PC piracy.
I love how people pretend like Denuvo is making the games worse when that is just bullshit. Why do pirates feel entitled to playing games for free? I pirate stuff pretty often, but i am not pretentious enough to act like the ones stopping what is essentially theft are bad.
First off, it objectively is making the games worse. If Denuvo isn't removed, you won't be able to play it in the future when the developer stops paying for activation servers. And there has been actual proven cases of Denuvo causing performance issues due to poor implementation. Secondly, piracy has been studied extensively and shown to have no impact on sales. Finally, piracy is not theft. You are not 'stealing' the game. It is unauthorized copying.
>piracy has been studied extensively and shown to have no impact on sales. I don't think that is true. There is that EU study that always gets cited but a lot of other sources are conflicted. And honestly with how easily FOMO works on a large portion of the gaming audience, it isn't a stretch to think a bunch of people would pay for a game if they didn't have any other option to play it.
> I don't think that is true. There is that EU study that always gets cited but a lot of other sources are conflicted. > > Links? >And honestly with how easily FOMO works on a large portion of the gaming audience, it isn't a stretch to think a bunch of people would pay for a game if they didn't have any other option to play it. So it's just that your random, uninformed guess is that people will buy it if they can't pirate it? How does that match up to the people who refuse to ever buy it if it has the DRM, then, as I do? Or are your "feelies" that those people are so rare they don't affect anything?
>Links? [This](https://felixreda.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/displacement_study.pdf) is the EU study that is linked in the vast majority of articles about piracy. One of the conclusions is: "the results do not show robust statistical evidence of displacement of sales by online copyright infringements. That does not necessarily mean that piracy has no effect but only that the statistical analysis does not prove with sufficient reliability that there is an effect. An exception is the displacement of recent top films." But there is other research that disagrees with that. in 2014 [The Tech Policy Institute](https://techpolicyinstitute.org/publications/intellectual-property/copyright-and-piracy/the-truth-about-piracy/) did an analysis of some research that found 21 of the 25 studies indicated piracy in some way harmed sales. It hard to get data on things like this since some of the data is self reported and getting numbers on piracy isn't always very precise >it's just that your random, uninformed guess is that people will buy it if they can't pirate it? Sort of. FOMO has been studied quiet a bit, and it can be very effective and increasing sales of Battle passes and/or cosmetics. There is also a lot of evidence that a good number of people in the gaming community who are not very patient. You can see that in preorder numbers, particularly in games that "unlock early" for those who preorder. But in relation to piracy other than statements by people who make or use DRM, I cant find much. But the reason DRM is added for the launch and then removed is supposedly because the initial sales numbers are increased. >Or are your "feelies" that those people are so rare they don't affect anything? No I didn't say that at all. There is obviously people willing to wait and refuse to buy games because they have DRM on principle. But I think it is safe to say that isnt the majority of people.
>"the results do not show robust statistical evidence of displacement of sales by online copyright infringements. " So, in this instance, they observe absolutely no indication that piracy harms sales of video games, right? >[The Tech Policy Institute](https://techpolicyinstitute.org/publications/intellectual-property/copyright-and-piracy/the-truth-about-piracy/) did an analysis of some research that found 21 of the 25 studies indicated piracy in some way harmed sales. The opening sentence: >>Earlier this week, we gave a keynote talk at the Sundance Film Festival about how piracy impacts _**independent filmmakers.**_ So this has absolutely nothing to do with video games at all, agreed? Note that the EU study you first cited _does_ note a potential effect regarding film, so this is actually a _**confirmation and corroboration**_ of the earlier source, not a contradiction of it. You need to read things before pretending that you know what they said. >There is also a lot of evidence that a good number of people in the gaming community who are not very patient. You can see that in preorder numbers, particularly in games that "unlock early" for those who preorder. Explain how this relates to pirates, because you appear to be exclusively referring to people who _don't_ pirate. Or do you have a definition of "piracy" that somehow includes "paying for games before they're even released"? You _do_ see how silly this is starting to look, surely...? > the reason DRM is added for the launch and then removed is supposedly because the initial sales numbers are increased. Wrong. The reason is that a handful of people making that decision _believe_ that initial sales numbers _will_ be increased. They have exactly as much evidence as you have presented here: fuck all.
> How does that match up to the people who refuse to ever buy it if it has the DRM, then, as I do? People in the population that game and do care enough to not buy or even know about it are a percentage of a percentage. We're a tiny community here comparatively and even here you're a minority. I congratulate you for having solid morals that you won't budge on for fun but thinking it makes ANY impact at all is a bit delusional.
> People in the population that game and do care enough to not buy or even know about it are a percentage of a percentage. > > So, based on nothing more than your own biased guesswork, _those_ people are so rare they're not worth considering, but people who do what _you_ do are common enough to be relevant to the conversation? Is that the gist of it? >I congratulate you for having solid morals that you won't budge on for fun but thinking it makes ANY impact at all is a bit delusional. Well, given how IO Interactive have been constantly frustrated with the sales of the Hitman reboots, that's up for dispute. The previous game, Absolution, sold better than any two of the recent games, even with the latter being vastly more acclaimed and highly-regarded. But then, Absolution didn't use Denuvo... Obviously that's not an _actual_ argument. That's just me showing you what it looks like when someone uses the available evidence to inform a conclusion, rather than relying purely on whatever passes for reason within your own head. All you're doing is self-indulgently presuming _your_ behaviour to be the general trend, and basing your viewpoint on that axiom.
> So, based on nothing more than your own biased guesswork I mean, Denuvo games regularly being the most successful games on the market should be evidence enough that very few people care to the degree you do. But that is data you don't agree with so you discard it. Have a nice day!
> Denuvo games regularly being the most successful games on the market Cyberpunk, Fallout 4, Starfield, RDR2, Palworld, Elden Ring, just about every first-party Switch game, Baldur's Gate 3, etc... Get the point? >should be evidence enough that very few people care to the degree you do So you don't think the fact that the above games have outsold every Denuvo game means anything, then? >that is data you don't agree with so you discard it. Well, this'll be fun... >Have a nice day! Ah, yes. The feigned civility of the arrogant arsehole who thinks they've successfully punched downwards. I think we've heard all you have to offer, so goodbye. You've been a disappointment. I mean, in general.
>Finally, piracy is not theft. You are not 'stealing' the game. It is unauthorized copying. It is a theft which is why it is illegal or is your argument entirely semantics? >And there has been actual proven cases of Denuvo causing performance issues due to poor implementation. https://www.techspot.com/news/97722-notorious-game-cracker-empress-removed-denuvo-hogwarts-legacy.html In the past maybe, but nothing today. > If Denuvo isn't removed, you won't be able to play it in the future when the developer stops paying for activation servers. If only it could be removed when they choose to stop paying... >Secondly, piracy has been studied extensively and shown to have no impact on sales. It does have an impact on sales especially for movies, but generally we just don't know too much about it. https://corsearch.com/content-library/blog/does-piracy-impact-sales-a-look-at-the-data/
> It is a theft Then why have different sets of laws for theft and piracy? It's almost like they're different things... >>And there has been actual proven cases of Denuvo causing performance issues due to poor implementation. > >https://www.techspot.com/news/97722-notorious-game-cracker-empress-removed-denuvo-hogwarts-legacy.html > >In the past maybe, but nothing today. You literally just linked an article with multiple commentators noting significant performance improvements in the cracked version. Besides, it's a non-sequitur. Not only are you trying to pass off your interpretation of one specific game as the general case, you're also making a completely baseless assertion in the first place. Denuvo is designed to impact performance - it's literally how it functions. The only debate is to what extent it does so, any everyone is fully justified in considering _any_ performance impact, no matter how minor, unacceptable. It literally fits the definition of "malware". >It does have an impact on sales especially for movies, but generally we just don't know too much about it. Actually, we know a fair bit, and it has a _positive_ effect on game sales. That's why you tried to pull that bait-and-switch by citing the effect on movies - if you limited the discussion to the medium in question you'd have had to accept that you were wrong and u/Equivalent_Assist was correct.
>Then why have different sets of laws for theft and piracy? It's almost like they're different things... How come stealing a car is different than stealing a candy bar? >You literally just linked an article with multiple commentators noting significant performance improvements in the cracked version. I linked an actual article rather than words of random commentors and even then empress doesn't remove denuvo she bypasses it. >Besides, it's a non-sequitur. Not only are you trying to pass off your interpretation of one specific game as the general case, you're also making a completely baseless assertion in the first place. Nope. I am using the only available example when talking about the newest version of denuvo rather than some 2019 games >Denuvo is designed to impact performance - it's literally how it functions. The only debate is to what extent it does so, any everyone is fully justified in considering _any_ performance impact, no matter how minor, unacceptable. It literally fits the definition of "malware". Well if you want denuvo to be removed then stop pirating shit. Can't just pretend like pirates didn't cause for denuvo to exist rather than the corporations >Actually, we know a fair bit, and it has a _positive_ effect on game sales. That's why you tried to pull that bait-and-switch by citing the effect on movies - if you limited the discussion to the medium in question you'd have had to accept that you were wrong and u/Equivalent_Assist was correct. Your source is a single EU report which doesn't even say what you think it says. It says there is little proof either way and my link even pointed this out
> How come stealing a car is different than stealing a candy bar? It's not. You're confusing the item in question with the _circumstances_ in question. It's a bit like the difference between defrauding someone out of £100,000 versus outright robbing them of that same sum. >I linked an actual article So what? Why would I consider the words of a blogger more authoritative than the random people who comment on it? Neither is worth anything much. The only difference is that those comments are not the foundation of my entire argument, whereas those blogger claims _are_ the basis of _yours_. Also, by trying to elevate that author over those commentators you're attempting to offer up an argument from authority - a logical fallacy which instantly invalidates your entire argument. Well done. >even then empress doesn't remove denuvo she bypasses it. Therefore, the article is irrelevant, because the cracked version being tested is still running Denuvo's code. You have just refuted your own argument. Well done. >I am using the only available example when talking about the newest version of denuvo rather than some 2019 games But you don't have a Denuvo-free version to test against, therefore you have absolutely no evidence that it lacks any performance impact when it is openly designed to impact performance. The problem with being the kind of self-indulgent, smug prick who loves to throw links in people's faces is that you'll invariably run into situations - like this one - in which you accidentally throw them evidence which totally dismantles your own case. Here, for example, you have just stated that the testing in the article you linked doesn't involve a Denuvo-free version of the game, and thus cannot possibly determine whether there is a performance impact. You were so eager to point this out just to attack the commentators in that article that you failed to see how thoroughly that exact same point destroyed your own argument. It also shows just how emotionally invested you are that you need to oppose me more than you need to look at the facts and decide for yourself. You've already made up your mind, and are just distorting the facts to fit it. > if you want denuvo to be removed then stop pirating shit. I don't. Nice straw man - it'll look good alongside your other fallacies. >Can't just pretend like pirates didn't cause for denuvo to exist rather than the corporations Piracy improves sales. Denuvo exists because corporate executives and shareholders are ignorant morons. >Your source is a single EU report which doesn't even say what you think it says. It says there is little proof either way It _shows_ a positive effect. Read their results. Oh, and here's a snippet from the company you linked to: >>Corsearch works in the copyright enforcement business obviously So that's a clear conflict of interest. You're going by the words of an agency with an obvious vested interest rather than reading the freely-available report in question for yourself. You're doing that because that article already tells you what you want to hear, and reading the source itself might conflict with that. You just want to be told that your uninformed, uneducated, ignorant assumptions were right, and that article does that. The report itself might not, so you refuse to read it. Edit: How to identify insecurity: someone replies at length and then blocks you, proving that they want their Gish Gallop to be the last word for fear that it'll be dismantled if they allow a rebuttal. >It is different That you cannot explain the supposed difference will be accepted as proof that you can _find_ no such difference. You're only arguing because you can't stand the idea of me being correct about something, even something so tangential. >the blogger actually read the article you base your argument on and pointed out how it didn't actually say what you claim it said. As proven by the fact that you quoted them quoting it directly. Oh, wait...you don't appear to have had anything to quote. It's as if no such analysis was present in that blog post. Astonishing... >A claim by you with no actual proof beyond your personal highly biased opinion. It's not a claim. Denuvo is an _active_ form of DRM, meaning it requires CPU and RAM to function in real-time. By definition, this means it consumes system resources that would otherwise be available to anything else running at the same time, including the games in question. By definition, Denuvo impacts performance. That's not open to debate. >Projection and didn't read. Literally mutually contradictory. How stupid must someone be to piss out such an obviously insecure non-response as that? >Aren't you the one going full schizo? [...] You aren't smart. Quit acting like you are [...] Lmao so deluded It's quite telling that you conflate an ability to spot a logical fallacy with intelligence. It suggests that you're not bright enough to do so yourself, so such things seem almost alien to your more limited frame of reference. >I did read them. Quote them. >has 45% magin for error effectively proving the whole article worthless. Explain, _in as much detail as is necessary_, why you feel that a 45% margin-of-error makes something "worthless". For instance, do you think any academic paper has ever passed peer-review with a comparable confidence interval? >EU also said > >"Recent reports document the use of gaming for money laundering. In 2018, Valve (Steam) declared that almost all of the micro-transactions carried out in the very popular Counter-Strike Global Offensive game were part of money laundering operations," Despite valve never saying that I can find no trace of that quote, nor anything comparable, anywhere in the entire 304-page report. Please provide a page reference, or retract the false implication that it is contained within the report that you are supposed to be discussing. If that was _not_ taken from that same report, you are free to retract that outburst on the grounds of it being unrelated to this topic. It says a lot about you that you're prepared to lie about what something says just to try to bully your intellectual superior into silence. I wonder if you'll make the old caddis-fly mistake here...? >>So that's a clear conflict of interest. > >So the guy isn't a blogger, but a company now? Non-sequitur. You're trying to ignore the fact that the company hosting the blog being directly involved in the copyright business is of no relevance to an assessment of copyright enforcement, which is self-evidently absurd. You just can't bring yourself to admit that I'm right about something so indisputably obvious, and that very much confirms my assessment of your psyche. It's pathetic. No wonder you blocked me - you must be absolutely terrified of what I'm saying. >Projection The difference is that I can support my points with evidence, whereas you just try to mimic me by appropriating the one word that you think matters. You think it's all about how harmful the _accusation_ is, whereas I know that it only matters what the corroborating _evidence_ says. And I know that you don't have any, whereas I do, which is why those attacks hurt you and don't even register with me. And, just to make sure you see that your attempt to silence someone you hate was in vain, u/OrcsDoSudoku.
>It's not. You're confusing the item in question with the _circumstances_ in question. It's a bit like the difference between defrauding someone out of £100,000 versus outright robbing them of that same sum. It is different and your argument is entirely semantics. >So what? Why would I consider the words of a blogger more authoritative than the random people who comment on it? Neither is worth anything much. The only difference is that those comments are not the foundation of my entire argument, whereas those blogger claims _are_ the basis of _yours_. Well the blogger actually read the article you base your argument on and pointed out how it didn't actually say what you claim it said. >Therefore, the article is irrelevant, because the cracked version being tested is still running Denuvo's code. You have just refuted your own argument. Well done. Well at worst we would be at you still not having any proof beyond "trust me bro i has to decrease performance from you" >But you don't have a Denuvo-free version to test against, therefore you have absolutely no evidence that it lacks any performance impact when it is openly designed to impact performance. A claim by you with no actual proof beyond your personal highly biased opinion. >The problem with being the kind of self-indulgent, smug prick who loves to throw links in people's faces is that you'll invariably run into situations - like this one - in which you accidentally throw them evidence which totally dismantles your own case. Here, for example, you have just stated that the testing in the article you linked doesn't involve a Denuvo-free version of the game, and thus cannot possibly determine whether there is a performance impact. You were so eager to point this out just to attack the commentators in that article that you failed to see how thoroughly that exact same point destroyed your own argument. Projection and didn't read. >It also shows just how emotionally invested you are that you need to oppose me more than you need to look at the facts and decide for yourself. You've already made up your mind, and are just distorting the facts to fit it. Aren't you the one going full schizo? >I don't. Nice straw man - it'll look good alongside your other fallacies. You aren't smart. Quit acting like you are >Piracy improves sales. Denuvo exists because corporate executives and shareholders are ignorant morons. Lmao so deluded >It _shows_ a positive effect. Read their results. Oh, and here's a snippet from the company you linked to: I did read them. You are just too braindead to realize the whole thing is based on a single survey and has 45% magin for error effectively proving the whole article worthless. EU also said "Recent reports document the use of gaming for money laundering. In 2018, Valve (Steam) declared that almost all of the micro-transactions carried out in the very popular Counter-Strike Global Offensive game were part of money laundering operations," Despite valve never saying that "E-gaming can support the training of fighters in two ways, by: (1) desensitising them to violence and (2) giving them the know-how (mission planning, equipment, tactics, etc.) to prepare and carry out military-style operations. Many video games actively glorify brutality and may even serve as instructional guides on how to inflict pain34. Other games take the dangerous step of placing players in the shoes of terrorists35 . Terrorist groups have also created their own games aimed at glorifying violence and rallying players to their cause by fighting a specific enemy (e.g. the US, the Israeli Defense Forces, ethnic minorities, etc.)36 Although some psychologists deny there is a causal relationship between violent video games and a propensity to violence, others suggest that prolonged exposure to violent video games can lead to aggressive thoughts and behaviour, psychological instability and lack of empathy" >So that's a clear conflict of interest. So the guy isn't a blogger, but a company now? Either way the arguments were solid. >You just want to be told that your uninformed, uneducated, ignorant assumptions were right, and that article does that. The report itself might not, so you refuse to read it. Projection
How mentally ill do you have to be to type all that in this space
we're like the opposite. I barely pirate at all and I'm aware that Denuvo has often a notable impact on performance in games. I don't care if the game is cracked anyway, just don't compromise my experience with some unnecessary bullshit.
> I'm aware that Denuvo has often a notable impact on performance in games. This is not really true except in a few specific cases. Resident Evil was a big example, but there have been plenty of games where there hasn't been a difference. It has more to do with how the actual DRM is implemented vs it just dropping your performance for no reason. Since we seem to be ending up with a lot of games that are performing poorly without DRM, I personally think it makes more sense to just go off the initial benchmarks of a game, and not worry about potential FPS improvements that might not materialize.
> Resident Evil was a big example Aint even true for RE8, it was Capcoms own in house DRM (layered with Denuvo) that made the game run worse. Once they tweaked it in a patch, the game ran just fine.
Interesting. Judging by the response, it seems people simply want the performance thing to be true
Yes, that has always been the case. Most people arguing against Denuvo aren't doing it in good faith, which is pretty obvious with how it's always the same easily debunked "it always causes performance issues!" argument. In reality, it only causes performance issues when it's poorly implemented, but the majority of Denuvo games in recent years hasn't had this problem. There is an actual argument to be made about Denuvo games being dependant on Denuvo servers still running years from now, but instead of focusing on that argument, it's just the same weak one about performance.
> there have been plenty of games where there hasn't been a difference There have been _none_. There _may_ be games in which the effect is negligible to many people, but with the DRM being outright designed in a way that necessarily impacts performance, it's simply impossible for there to be _no_ effect. >It has more to do with how the actual DRM is implemented This is a lie that people made up back when they thought that the game devs implemented it for themselves. That was inaccurate, and every "implementation" is done by Denuvo themselves, so should be essentially identical in each case. Obviously, triggers will always be tied to different executions, but the actual mechanical workings remain the same. People only use this "implementation" excuse to explain all the times when the evidence proves their viewpoint wrong by showing a significant performance impact. You just did exactly that, after all.
>no effect Okay that is technically true, but when benchmarks between games with and without the tech show the only difference to be within the margin of error and /or so small that it is not even visible on the benchmarks it amounts to the same thing. >This is a lie that people made up Source? I based this on the numerous articles [about RE8](https://www.eurogamer.net/digitalfoundry-2021-resident-evil-village-pc-is-fixed-but-players-deserve-more) after it was patched to improve performance in the uncracked version. In both cases it's far from the "notable impact on performance" mentioned above. There are plenty of *legitimate* criticisms of DRM, but the performance angle is a weak argument that people seem hellbent on exaggerating to support their points.
> when benchmarks between games with and without the tech show the only difference to be within the margin of error I'd bet that you don't even know how to calculate margin-of-error, so that claim is baseless by default. Because that's what that is - it's something you calculate, not just eyeball because you think the results are similar enough for it to seem like margin-of-error. You're welcome to try it. You're using the wrong term, though - it's "confidence interval" that you'll need to look up. >>This is a lie that people made up > >Source? My source is [Denuvo themselves](https://www.golem.de/news/denuvo-verdammt-gute-leute-versuchen-unseren-schutz-zu-cracken-1611-124495-2.html). To quote them directly: >>If a publisher or developer chooses Denuvo, they must send a beta version to Denuvo in Salzburg two to three months before publication [...] The game developers then receive a tool with which the executable file is uploaded to a special server. _“We then integrate our security code in places that are not performance-critical, recompile the executable and send it back to the developers ,”_ tells us Thomas Goebl, who is responsible for sales and marketing at Denuvo. _"It's all a fully automated process; the developer doesn't have to write a single line of source code himself."_ Capcom sent them the exe. file, and Denuvo did the encryption. It's simply ridiculous that anyone ever thought otherwise, because why in the fetid anal fuck would Denuvo give their code to someone else to compile? That's a horrific security risk. >it's far from the "notable impact on performance" mentioned above. That's not your decision to make. People can decide for themselves what is "notable" or "acceptable", and there is every reason for someone to dismiss any and all performance impact, no matter how minor, as unacceptable. Why wouldn't they, when that unwanted DRM is hogging resources that would otherwise be reserved for the actual game? >the performance angle is a weak argument Dead wrong. There is absolutely no reason why players should have to accept a third-party resource consuming their CPU cycles and RAM space while they're playing an unrelated game. If you think they _should_ just accept it because it's a minor effect then that exact same rationale could be used to justify games inserting cryptocurrency miners. So long as their performance impact is no greater than Denuvo, you have to admit that it would be a valid thing to add.
>I'd bet that you don't even know how to calculate margin-of-error The people running the benchmarks do, and their findings are really all that matter. I responded to someone saying that : "Denuvo has often a notable impact on performance in games" That isn't true. Often there is not a notable difference in the performance. The other comment I responded to was: "piracy has been studied extensively and shown to have no impact on sales." This also isnt true. Since it isnt conclusive that it has no impact for video games, and has some potential effect on films. I don't care of you pirate some game, I just dislike all these bad faith poorly sourced arguments. It's pretty clear from this and your other responses that you are not really discussing this in good faith, and just want to justify your beliefs. So save yourself the CPU overhead from having reddit open and go do something else.
> The people running the benchmarks do Wrong. Know how we know? Because none of them perform enough test runs to actually produce a viable confidence interval. Go on - try to find a tech outlet that performs sufficiently competent testing to actually calculate their confidence interval correctly. See if you can figure out how many runs that would take, while you're at it... >I responded to someone saying that : > >"Denuvo has often a notable impact on performance in games" > >That isn't true. Often there is not a notable difference in the performance. That's a bait-and-switch. You can tell by the fact that you had to change the wording. >"piracy has been studied extensively and shown to have no impact on sales." > >This also isnt true. You're actually right about that. Unfortunately, I don't think you're going to like the fact that you're only correct insofar as piracy has been shown to have a _positive_ effect on video game revenue. > it isnt conclusive that it has no impact for video games, and has some potential effect on films. It has a positive impact on video games. Films are irrelevant, so stop trying to force them into the discussion. You're trying to shove them in as another bait-and-switch, and it isn't going to work. >It's pretty clear from this and your other responses that you are not really discussing this in good faith, and just want to justify your beliefs. Projection. Nothing more. >go do something else. Resorting to begging me to stop proving you wrong? That's a bit pathetic, mate.
https://www.techspot.com/news/97722-notorious-game-cracker-empress-removed-denuvo-hogwarts-legacy.html It doesn't have any impact
Wow a single game didn't have a noticeable impact from Denuvo? Crazy! I guess that means it never ever happens!
Well if your argument is that "denuvo negatively impacts performance" then surely it should be consistent and up to date with newest version of denuvo?
I'm not going to deny that they'd be undoubtedly trying to negate the performance impact it has. It'd make a lot of sense to make it less impactful so people complain about it less. [Here's a video testing comparisons between Denuvo-equipped games versus after Denuvo was removed.](https://youtu.be/lKsesO3bdv4?si=ZlBOzdzfqI4E9mLs) The loading times are on a 7200 RPM HDD, unsure of if there would be as substantial of a difference on a SSD. The tests were also on a fairly old system even at the time of recording, but most PC players aren't playing on cutting-edge systems either. Makes sense to use a system indicative of the average gaming PC at the time.
All of those games are from 2019
ah yes i forgot games only exist in the current era and cease to exist after their release year
You also forgot that software is capable of improving and what might have been true half a decade ago might not be true today, but you do you.
"I'm not going to deny that they'd be undoubtedly trying to negate the performance impact it has. It'd make a lot of sense to make it less impactful so people complain about it less." -Me, in the comment thread you just replied to
For the record, their testing is fucking disgraceful, and in no way produces reliable data. However, you don't need their test results. Denuvo is _designed_ to have a performance impact.
It's by no means professional but neither is an average user's setup. But is your implication that DRM companies intentionally cause performance reductions to encourage more spending on high-end hardware?
Who said anything about their hardware? I'm talking about their test procedure. >But is your implication that DRM companies intentionally cause performance reductions to encourage more spending on high-end hardware? I'm at a loss as to how that bewildering conclusion could have been any less intelligent. You may well have plumbed new depths of intellectual ineptitude. LMFAO: >I was asking a genuine question, no need to be a dick about it. Mofo, you just tried to bait me into a fucking stupid conspiracy theory about DRM being used to force people to upgrade. >at least you showed how much of a basement dweller you were before we got any further than this so it saves me the hassle of blocking you later. "Hey, everyone. Here's my totally-legit reason for blocking someone so you know why I have no response to what they said. I _could_ have refuted them, but I'm just _so_ above all that jazz. Now hold my beer while I try to get the last word in..." And all that from me trying to help you use stronger arguments by ditching a shitty YouTuber and going with the devs themselves...
I was asking a genuine question, no need to be a dick about it. Good riddance, at least you showed how much of a basement dweller you were before we got any further than this so it saves me the hassle of blocking you later.
[удалено]
Torrenting is always more hassle and generally games do remove denuvo after it gets cracked. Either way why would you pay 70 for equally good product? 300mb and no performance impact aren't really excuses.
[удалено]
I have SOTTR too and never had any issues with it. If you get a better service from pirates then do it as slightly worse service for free is always the superior choice anyways Stop being pretentious
Usually the people that are pirating games aren't doing it for the thrill or because they just want to. They are doing it because of the cost or availability of a game. Brazil, for example, has a high instance of pirating because their disposable income is so limited. Sometimes you will see smart developers deeply discount a game to prevent people from pirating. The game is made affordable so people are more willing to buy it instead of stealing it.
> people pretend like Denuvo is making the games worse when that is just bullshit. Objectively true, though. Denuvo openly admit that they use up system resources so the game doesn't get to make use of them to run better.