You have literally zero proof in regard the impact Denuvo has on sales, just as you could argue that I have no conclusive evidence that it actually helps sales. You will find that I *have* actually done research on the matter though, rather than just peruse warez sites, and evidence of the impact of piracy is out there. It is just a fact that the initial sales period has to be protected, and seeing as it is rare that Denuvo games are patched day-one, then it's worth is obviously there when it comes to maximising sales.
Try reading this article (http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_1.html) and educating yourself, before accusing others of not doing their own research - in particular the economy of piracy section and the DRM section. Also read up on why Jonathon Blow added it to The Witness then removed it.
As for Denuvo being 'useless' and easy to crack. It is a constantly evolving piece of kit. It was 'cracked' a long, long time back, then re-coded and had a long period where it was successful, before being slightly less of late. It is in their own interest to strengthen it again, and I hope they do.
You have done so much research you're constantly avoiding the question of why game companies continued to use toxic draconian DRMs on their games despite them being cracked one hour after release. Still waiting on your amazing research on that.
And lol there are still games with Securom, TAGES, and Games for Windows Live dependencies to this day. Publishers can't be trusted to patch their games.
You have done so much research you're constantly avoiding the question of why game companies continued to use toxic draconian DRMs on their games despite them being cracked one hour after release. Still waiting on your amazing research on that.
Just as you avoid facts placed before you. How many Denuvo games have been cracked 'one hour after release'? More remain un-cracked to this day than were cracked that quickly.
As for Denuvo being 'useless' and easy to crack. It is a constantly evolving piece of kit. It was 'cracked' a long, long time back, then re-coded and had a long period where it was successful, before being slightly less of late. It is in their own interest to strengthen it again, and I hope they do.
The makers of Denuvo stolen their DRM tech from another company and repackaged it to sell, hence why Denuvo protection is weaker because their victim is confronting them now for compensation.
The latter, haha. Sorry if I wasn't clear, but we're probably on the same page. If people legitimately don't have an issue with it, then that's one thing. My comment was more about the drive-by posters that downplay the issue without argument in order to stifle discussion.
I know the concerns but there is already prove that most is not true. And yet people still go around spreading this false information as fact. Recently even Jim Sterling stated some of those "facts". People should do research beforehand and not spread false information all over the internet... But that is todays world it seems.
Would you care to point us to this proof? If an independent, respected, neutral party conducted a study that definitively claimed that Denuvo no longer has any of the issues associated with it, I would reconsider my stance if presented with it. At best, my principle-based opposition would be all that remains.
Yeah I think some people jumping in to complain are just looking for an excuse to pirate the game. Not necessarily you, PhantomThief or that other guy getting incredibly bent out of shape and calling me a Trump voter.
Just as you avoid facts placed before you. How many Denuvo games have been cracked 'one hour after release'? More remain un-cracked to this day than were cracked that quickly.
So game companies have literally been wating their money on useless DRM for literally decades despite it being completely useless, but now it's the time where "oh they are using it and if they're using it is because it works"?
Yeah I think some people jumping in to complain are just looking for an excuse to pirate the game. Not necessarily you, PhantomThief or that other guy getting incredibly bent out of shape and calling me a Trump voter.
Considering you've constantly tried to avoid acknowleding the very simple fact that Denuvo requires periodic online server checks, I think it's quite accurate.
So game companies have literally been wating their money on useless DRM for literally decades despite it being completely useless, but now it's the time where "oh they are using it and if they're using it is because it works"?
Considering you've constantly tried to avoid acknowleding the very simple fact that Denuvo requires periodic online server checks, I think it's quite accurate.
So game companies have literally been wating their money on useless DRM for literally decades despite it being completely useless, but now it's the time where "oh they are using it and if they're using it is because it works"?
I don't know how many times I can tell you this. Denuvo acknowledge that therir protection will inevitably be cracked. You surely understand that games are sold at their most financially rewarding during the first month of retail right? If a publisher can get through this period un-cracked, then they consider it a success. Granted, Denuvo has been cracked faster of late, but even if it goes a week, then research shows that it is more financially viable for a publisher to pay for Denuvo as it impacts less on sales.
Given the fresh run of Denuvo protected games, it will certainly be interesting to see if they have come up with any more robust protection with this version. If it is cracked within 5 days again, then it's usefulness will rightfully be questioned.
Would you care to point us to this proof? If an independent, respected, neutral party conducted a study that definitively claimed that Denuvo no longer has any of the issues associated with it, I would reconsider my stance if presented with it. At best, my principle-based opposition would be all that remains.
For one, you read from SE Community Manager personally above that they did a lot of testing to not have the game be compromised. Also it is confirmed by him that you can play offline no problem. This you can even try yourself on any Denuvo game. Also, you can try to see how performance is effected if you manage to aquire a Denuvo free game and test the performance in comparison to the Denuvo protected one.
Personally I have no desire to argue about the value of DRM with anyone (it's futile, different people have different experiences and different values), but just as I am apparently not entitled to a game without DRM so too are publishers not entitled to sales or positive reviews and my sense is that they value a marginal sale more than I value a marginal extra game.
If a publisher makes a gamble that DRM stops more piracy than it hurts word of mouth then they can reap the benefits and drawbacks of that trade on their own.
But it also means that if sales are slow out of the gate and word of mouth is poor and internet cretins review bomb or spam their forums or soak up community manager time clarifying misconceptions, like, oh well? A lot of modern game marketing is about creating an emotional connection with your fan base and reaping the benefits of it, so it stands to reason that there's a flipside when emotionally invested people feel wronged.
I know the concerns but there is already prove that most is not true. And yet people still go around spreading this false information as fact. Recently even Jim Sterling stated some of those "facts". People should do research beforehand and not spread false information all over the internet... But that is todays world it seems.
It seems that this is all true. You did your research
It is not like I want to convince people that Denuvo is good. I just want that people can form their own opinions based an facts. Unfortunately, there is too much misinformation spread. That is what I wanted to make clear.
You either buy the product for what it is or you don't.
This whole "oh but denuvo makes the game run slower" crap has got to stop. Every single piece of code can be optimized to make the game run better. You either find the performance acceptable or you don't. You don't get to choose which piece of software the devs decide to use.
Denuvo is a tool to protect year long devotions and hard work towards a piece of software. If the devs feel like it may help them against piracy, you don't get to tell them not to do it. Its their game. This shit pisses me off so much.
Don't buy it if you don't want to but stop badmouthing devs who made the choice to use it for christ sake.
You have done so much research you're constantly avoiding the question of why game companies continued to use toxic draconian DRMs on their games despite them being cracked one hour after release. Still waiting on your amazing research on that.
Dude acts like Trump voters. Actual facts have been presented to him: he completely ignores them.
Lmao. You of all people talking about avoiding questions. Yeah I remember you cheerleading for publishers selling lootboxes to swindle the customer, while avoiding a clear question. Not all Denuvo games have been cracked day one, we will see soon enough if this one is.
You either buy the product for what it is or you don't.
This whole "oh but denuvo makes the game run slower" crap has got to stop. Every single piece of code can be optimized to make the game run better. You either find the performance acceptable or you don't. You don't get to choose which piece of software the devs decide to use.
Denuvo is a tool to protect year long devotions and hard work towards a piece of software. If the devs feel like it may help them against piracy, you don't get to tell them not to do it. Its their game. This shit pisses me off so much.
Don't buy it if you don't want to but stop badmouthing devs who made the choice to use it for christ sake.
Lmao. You of all people talking about avoiding questions. Yeah I remember you cheerleading for publishers selling lootboxes to swindle the customer, while avoiding a clear question. Not all Denuvo games have been cracked day one, we will see soon enough if this one is.
Another one that can't seem to be able to read I see.
Again, since you can't read: Publisher have used draconian DRMs for decades despite being cracked on day one. Some people are spouting that "publishers only doit because it works" despite years and years and years of evidence that they do it even if it doesn't work.
Denuvo is a tool to protect year long devotions and hard work towards a piece of software. If the devs feel like it may help them against piracy, you don't get to tell them not to do it. Its their game. This shit pisses me off so much.
Don't buy it if you don't want to but stop badmouthing devs who made the choice to use it for christ sake.
Another one that can't seem to be able to read I see.
Again, since you can't read: Publisher have used draconian DRMs for decades despite being cracked on day one. Some people are spouting that "publishers only doit because it works" despite years and years and years of evidence that they do it even if it doesn't work.
Publishers have been using Denuvo, which this thread is about and it hasn't been cracked day one on all of the cases. Denuvo works for the time before it gets cracked or removed. And I'm in favor of devs removing it, let's say after a year or even just a half. And if it gets cracked, then take it away asap.
You either buy the product for what it is or you don't.
This whole "oh but denuvo makes the game run slower" crap has got to stop. Every single piece of code can be optimized to make the game run better. You either find the performance acceptable or you don't. You don't get to choose which piece of software the devs decide to use.
Denuvo is a tool to protect year long devotions and hard work towards a piece of software. If the devs feel like it may help them against piracy, you don't get to tell them not to do it. Its their game. This shit pisses me off so much.
Don't buy it if you don't want to but stop badmouthing devs who made the choice to use it for christ sake.
Denuvo doesn't protect shit and only affects legit consumers. You bet your ass i'm going to badmouth everyone who uses it. I get to say whatever I wish against publishers and devs that literally made a game worse for their legit costumers.
You either buy the product for what it is or you don't.
This whole "oh but denuvo makes the game run slower" crap has got to stop. Every single piece of code can be optimized to make the game run better. You either find the performance acceptable or you don't. You don't get to choose which piece of software the devs decide to use.
Denuvo is a tool to protect year long devotions and hard work towards a piece of software. If the devs feel like it may help them against piracy, you don't get to tell them not to do it. Its their game. This shit pisses me off so much.
Don't buy it if you don't want to but stop badmouthing devs who made the choice to use it for christ sake.
We do get to tell them how we feel about it, because we are their target audience. We are the ones they want to part with our money, so of course they should hear feedback.
The notion that our opinions on how products are packaged doesn't count is ridiculous.
If they want to convince us that is needed, then let them convince us. We shouldn't back down from our position on how we want the products delivered, because of assumptions about the effect of the Denuvo DRM (when they're even so kind to tell us that they're actually using it).
If they want to convince us that is needed, then let them convince us. We shouldn't back down from our position on how we want the products delivered, because of assumptions about the effect of the Denuvo DRM (when they're even so kind to tell us that they're actually using it).
I haven't bought a game with Denuvo before but I was gonna purchase the game on Steam most regardless. I was confused by some posts in the first page as I thought it was cleared up in the OP but now I understand that offline play means you still need access to internet if only occasionally
For one, you read from SE Community Manager personally above that they did a lot of testing to not have the game be compromised. Also it is confirmed by him that you can play offline no problem. This you can even try yourself on any Denuvo game. Also, you can try to see how performance is effected if you manage to aquire a Denuvo free game and test the performance in comparison to the Denuvo protected one.
Two things with that. One, neither SE/DONTNOD nor I are independent or neutral parties in this discussion
and I'm definitely not a respected party lol
. Two, I will not be installing Denuvo on my machine for any reason, unless it was, again, demonstrated by an independent, respected, and neutral third-party that the software has no lingering effects on my machine (Denuvo's EULA states that a computer system may retain Denuvo files after the affected game is uninstalled). Sure, it may end up being nothing, but other users have had problems in the past, so why should I take the chance? The burden of proof isn't on me. The burden of proof is on Denuvo. They have to assure us that their software is no longer the problem that it has been in the past. And even then, who would trust them? They have very little goodwill with the gaming community, if any at all. Which is why an independent, respected, neutral third-party would have to test it out.
And this is to say nothing about the ideological opposition to DRM in general, which primarily centers around the claim that it doesn't affect dedicated pirates and causes inconvenience for legitimate consumers. Again, I could be convinced that Denuvo is harmless, but my disdain for DRM in general would still remain.
You have done so much research you're constantly avoiding the question of why game companies continued to use toxic draconian DRMs on their games despite them being cracked one hour after release. Still waiting on your amazing research on that.
Denuvo isn't being cracked one hour after release. It still takes at least a couple of days in the absolute best case scenario, and sometimes significantly longer. Square Enix's last major PC release, Nier, took MONTHS to get cracked.
If we do get the point where Denuvo is being cracked within hours, and publishers continue to use it, then we can have this discussion.
Meanwhile, games with Steam DRM are being cracked within hours, but most publishers refuse to make DRM-Free builds available because reasons.
Personally I have no desire to argue about the value of DRM with anyone (it's futile, different people have different experiences and different values), but just as I am apparently not entitled to a game without DRM so too are publishers not entitled to sales or positive reviews and my sense is that they value a marginal sale more than I value a marginal extra game.
If a publisher makes a gamble that DRM stops more piracy than it hurts word of mouth then they can reap the benefits and drawbacks of that trade on their own.
But it also means that if sales are slow out of the gate and word of mouth is poor and internet cretins review bomb or spam their forums or soak up community manager time clarifying misconceptions, like, oh well? A lot of modern game marketing is about creating an emotional connection with your fan base and reaping the benefits of it, so it stands to reason that there's a flipside when emotionally invested people feel wronged.
No desire to play this, but this is disappointing to keep seeing Denuvo being used. It's an anti-consumerist blight on this industry and it needs to die quickly.
I haven't bought a game with Denuvo before but I was gonna purchase the game on Steam most regardless. I was confused by some posts in the first page as I thought it was cleared up in the OP but now I understand that offline play means you still need access to internet if only occasionally
Two things with that. One, neither SE/DONTNOD nor I are independent or neutral parties in this discussion
and I'm definitely not a respected party lol
. Two, I will not be installing Denuvo on my machine for any reason, unless it was, again, demonstrated by an independent, respected, and neutral third-party that the software has no lingering effects on my machine (Denuvo's EULA states that a computer system may retain Denuvo files after the affected game is uninstalled). Sure, it may end up being nothing, but other users have had problems in the past, so why should I take the chance? The burden of proof isn't on me. The burden of proof is on Denuvo. They have to assure us that their software is no longer the problem that it has been in the past. And even then, who would trust them? They have very little goodwill with the gaming community, if any at all. Which is why an independent, respected, neutral third-party would have to test it out.
And this is to say nothing about the ideological opposition to DRM in general, which primarily centers around the claim that it doesn't affect dedicated pirates and causes inconvenience for legitimate consumers. Again, I could be convinced that Denuvo is harmless, but my disdain for DRM in general would still remain.
Denuvo does not install any software whatsoever on your machine. It is simply integrated in the game. You wouldn't know if you had a Denuvo game or not if you compare both game directories side by side. There are of course way to tell them apart if you are trained, say as someone who cracks these games I guess.
Why do people constantly worry about the "when the servers go offline, I won't be able to play this game"? I know at some point in time, all the multiplayer servers will end. Games like Battlegrounds, Destiny, Battlefield, and Call of Duty will no longer exist in their official multiplayer environment. But, does that hinder me from the playing the games now? Not at all.
So, when people say "I won't buy this game because when the DRM server goes offline, I won't be able to play", how does that really affect you in the next 1-5 years? Buy the game, play it, and then I guarantee you will move onto something else, and then something else after that.
Most people just don't like DRM like this, and you know what, even if some of it can be argued to be "perception" based, so what? Other developers don't use DRM so ask the likes of Square why they feel it's needed when others don't use it? Things always get pirated anyway, so the longstanding and on-going debate with devs and gamers is, make a good game, market it well, be smart with your social media interactions and you will profit greatly with the love of fans. Simple. Ask CDPR how they feel about optimising their efforts on those who will buy their products versus obsessing over those who won't. Time and time again it has to be proposed when you use heavy handed DRM how much of a PR hit do you take resulting in fewer sales? Pirates wait till its cracked anyway, people who are buying sometimes get turned off and/or wait for a sale when they hear you couldn't help make a deal with the DRM-Gods.
I just think these DRM companies get into bed with the publishers and they do deals in the boardrooms. Simple as that. Denuvo want to be the household DRM name on the PC just now, so they aggressively pursue getting into as many games as possible. It would be utterly fantastic to know what some of these contractual deals say on the paperwork. I've got a bet once they do a deal with a big publisher, that publisher probably has to put the DRM in a contractually obligated number of their games. Get Denuvo's name circulating as the DRM of choice by the big boys, and therefore attract other developers and publishers to think they must be the go to company for protection. It's like some mafia protection money based operation, to be honest. Pay us to protect your games, which get cracked anyway. Wooo.
Why do people constantly worry about the "when the servers go offline, I won't be able to play this game"? I know at some point in time, all the multiplayer servers will end. Games like Battlegrounds, Destiny, Battlefield, and Call of Duty will no longer exist in their official multiplayer environment. But, does that hinder me from the playing the games now? Not at all.
So, when people say "I won't buy this game because when the DRM server goes offline, I won't be able to play", how does that really affect you in the next 1-5 years? Buy the game, play it, and then I guarantee you will move onto something else, and then something else after that.
This is a single player game, people are particularly hostile to DRM in SP games. If it never gets shut off you end up needing to turn to cracks at some point way in the future. No point in arguing you never play 10~15 year old games ever again, some people do. You've bought something, why not want it preserved?
My concern is longevity.... With Denuvo, my games are reliant on them paying the AWS bill and I'm not too comfortable with that considering they're the same people behind SecuROM and that was used in AAA games and was abandoned after 6 years.
I'm sick of cracking games I've bought. One time is one time too many and across my library, I've had to do it quite a bit. Can we get a guarantee that Denuvo will be removed after a period of two years (it will absolutely have been cracked by then)?
You'll never get a guarantee. That's probably part of the mafia protection money contractual obligation as well. Shut the fuck up about ever removing the DRM via a patch, even if it's cracked in 2 days. Patching out Denuvo is like voiding whatever contract you signed with them. Probably plenty of red tape to get through to be able to release that patch.
My concern is longevity.... With Denuvo, my games are reliant on them paying the AWS bill and I'm not too comfortable with that considering they're the same people behind SecuROM and that was used in AAA games and was abandoned after 6 years.
I'm sick of cracking games I've bought. One time is one time too many and across my library, I've had to do it quite a bit. Can we get a guarantee that Denuvo will be removed after a period of two years (it will absolutely have been cracked by then)?
Why do people constantly worry about the "when the servers go offline, I won't be able to play this game"? I know at some point in time, all the multiplayer servers will end. Games like Battlegrounds, Destiny, Battlefield, and Call of Duty will no longer exist in their official multiplayer environment. But, does that hinder me from the playing the games now? Not at all.
So, when people say "I won't buy this game because when the DRM server goes offline, I won't be able to play", how does that really affect you in the next 1-5 years? Buy the game, play it, and then I guarantee you will move onto something else, and then something else after that.
What justification is there to have such a worry in a single player game? Especially one that'll be cracked within two weeks. It sucks that legitimate users are dealing with the implications of Denuvo far longer than the pirates ever do.
Why do people constantly worry about the "when the servers go offline, I won't be able to play this game"? I know at some point in time, all the multiplayer servers will end. Games like Battlegrounds, Destiny, Battlefield, and Call of Duty will no longer exist in their official multiplayer environment. But, does that hinder me from the playing the games now? Not at all.
So, when people say "I won't buy this game because when the DRM server goes offline, I won't be able to play", how does that really affect you in the next 1-5 years? Buy the game, play it, and then I guarantee you will move onto something else, and then something else after that.
This is a single player game, not a multiplayer only one.
I like to play games even if they released a crapload of years ago
Securom, DRM made by the same guys, made games unplayable on W10
Publishers and developers should make it a standard to remove it once it's cracked, and/or after an initial sales period.
Because then there's diminishing and/or no value in its protection, and it will primarily serve the purpose of making their games worse for paying customers, and may eventually serve to make them unplayable.
It just seems stupid to not do this?
Publishers are actively against game preservation. Square Enix is part of the ESA.
If/when the servers are shut down, they won't care. They care about the sales of new games. Which is why now is when they should be asked about removing it.
VibratingDonkey, i don't think you will get a straight forward answer because this might be a decision from S. Enix. You will probably get a non-answer: The decision is made by XX and will need time to get confirmation or Depends on whether it disrupt the game.
Can you list down games which S. Enix removed Denuvo before? That's the biggest hint there.
Why do people constantly worry about the "when the servers go offline, I won't be able to play this game"? I know at some point in time, all the multiplayer servers will end. Games like Battlegrounds, Destiny, Battlefield, and Call of Duty will no longer exist in their official multiplayer environment. But, does that hinder me from the playing the games now? Not at all.
So, when people say "I won't buy this game because when the DRM server goes offline, I won't be able to play", how does that really affect you in the next 1-5 years? Buy the game, play it, and then I guarantee you will move onto something else, and then something else after that.
First of all, you must realize the difference between singleplayer and multiplayer games, right? That the latter implies that you're not only dependent on the servers staying up, but also on other people playing it.
Singleplayer games is only about you, when you want to play the game, and how often you want to replay it. Your "guarantees" about how ofters will or will not play the game is not really relevant.
My steam account is 10 years old now, I have games that are as old as that, and I expect them to continue to work for me. Adding Denuvo to these games adds an uncertainty to that, that's completely unnecessary and that paying customers shouldn't have to deal with.
If you as a dev want to add an expiration to your product, then adjust your price accordingly.
You either buy the product for what it is or you don't.
This whole "oh but denuvo makes the game run slower" crap has got to stop. Every single piece of code can be optimized to make the game run better. You either find the performance acceptable or you don't. You don't get to choose which piece of software the devs decide to use.
Denuvo is a tool to protect year long devotions and hard work towards a piece of software. If the devs feel like it may help them against piracy, you don't get to tell them not to do it. Its their game. This shit pisses me off so much.
Don't buy it if you don't want to but stop badmouthing devs who made the choice to use it for christ sake.
Dude. I can't believe what I'm reading. You swallow your pride, let publishers have their way and take it like a champ. You're welcoming anti-consumer practices with arms wide open and tell off people who don't. You're like the perfect consumer in the eyes of publishers!
As I said in another thread, not buying the game only says that users of the platform aren't interested in the game, which is not necessarily what's happening here. People may want the game, but may not want to deal with third-party programs that limit their rights as users (aka DRM). But why would I even bother explaining that to you, when you're doing the PR work for Denuvo yourself?
Seriously, I just can't believe someone would willingly encourage the use of DRM. I'm speechless.
