Support NeoGAF

[Alexander DeLarge]

It stopped people from pirating, but it stopped even more people from buying it I'd imagine. Dishonored 2 wasn't cracked for several months, not because it was impossible but because it was an awful port with performance issues. I'd imagine the same thing is happening here. Why bypass the DRM before it's in an optimal state when they can patch the game and implement a new DRM scheme like Mass Effect Andromeda did (where Denuvo was bypassed, then an update that fixed the animations used a newer, different version of Denuvo).

If Ubisoft is more interested in chasing "lost sales due to piracy" at the expense of the user experience and possibly performance (we won't ever know this for sure unfortunately), they can fuck off. Denuvo is a ticking time bomb for the legitimate user and when they stop paying the AWS bill, a lot of games are going to be rendered unplayable by "legitimate means".

 

[llien]

We have official statement that it's not. I also have unofficial statement that it's bullshit which I prefer to believe more than the words of some hacker who failed at hacking the new protection and decided to hurt the company by spreading FUD about it.

Official statement comes from a biased source.
Could you give more details on the "unofficial statement"?

So what? Quake 1 run its internal scripting in a "virtual machine" which isn't dependent on any CPU instruction set - does it automatically mean that it's too CPU intensive for modern CPUs?

So does World of Warcraft (LUA) and it makes it one of the more CPU heavy games, unless my memory fails me.

 

[SMOK3Y]

This type of DRM is generally a waste of resources, actively harms legitimate customers, and doesn't work to stop piracy at all. ITS only proud purpose is anti-piracy PR/political messaging, which means it's basically worthless.

Whats wrong with that?

 

[PSlayer]

What you say makes perfect sense, but then, you also need to explain lack of noticeable performance boost in de-dunovod games.

The explanation for that is very simple actually, Denuvo is a very optimized DRM solution.From what i understood,it only virtualizes some specific pieces of code that are believed to be crucial for piracy. Back when it came out it was believed to only take something like ~5% of the CPU performance which, unless you have a very shitty CPU ,is not that big of a deal.

The problem here with ACO is,now that Crackers learned the way to break Denuvo fast, Ubisoft had the brilliant idea to throw another layer of virtualization on top of Denuvo.Now the entire game's code is running on a virtual machine and inside this VM there is denuvo here and there. For anyone who understands a little about VMs, this cannot be cheap CPU-wise.

 

[Woo-Fu]

I don't know why the title of the thread is a question. Ubisoft's layered VMProtect method is obviously working if the game hasn't been cracked yet.

People like to argue about how much impact that has on performance, but neither side has any real data.

People like to argue about how much impact the presence or lack of DRM has on sales, but neither side has any real data.

Oh, and of course there are the usual people arguing the semantics of theft as if that changes the morality of the situation.

Same DRM thread as usual.

 

[Deleted member 325805]

It only hurts paying customers, it always gets cracked anyway, usually within a week these days.

 

[KungFucius]

I don't know why the title of the thread is a question. Ubisoft's layered VMProtect method is obviously working if the game hasn't been cracked yet.

People like to argue about how much impact that has on performance, but neither side has any real data.

People like to argue about how much impact the presence or lack of DRM has on sales, but neither side has any real data.

Oh, and of course there are the usual people arguing the semantics of theft as if that changes the morality of the situation.

Same DRM thread as usual.

You say that it is definitely working but then say that there is no data to actually prove it for some relevant measures of success.

This DRM solution was a business decision and it undoubtedly came with success criteria. Having the game not being cracked as of yet is certainly a positive outcome, but the negative outcries about performance could impact long term sales for all PC titles. They really should find an objective game journal and have them analyze a DRM version of the game and compare that to a DRM free version on a distribution of HW covering min and max specs. The problem here is that there will be a difference and to some that is unacceptable. A lot of PC gamers spend a lot of time tweaking their systems for a few FPS. Having a game purposely running a few FPS slower to prevent something that does not impact them at all is a tough pill to swallow.

 

[Panajev2001a]

The explanation for that is very simple actually, Denuvo is a very optimized DRM solution.From what i understood,it only virtualizes some specific pieces of code that are believed to be crucial for piracy. Back when it came out it was believed to only take something like ~5% of the CPU performance which, unless you have a very shitty CPU ,is not that big of a deal.

The problem here with ACO is,now that Crackers learned the way to break Denuvo fast, Ubisoft had the brilliant idea to throw another layer of virtualization on top of Denuvo.Now the entire game's code is running on a virtual machine and inside this VM there is denuvo here and there. For anyone who understands a little about VMs, this cannot be cheap CPU-wise.

Denuvo was actually already using this kind of VMProtect/extra layer of security (Ubisoft is probably paying for the extra license cost and Denuvo is essentially back to its old former solution for this title), but they were sued as they were themselves not complying with this software’s license and this is when the problems for Denuvo, aka games cracked quickly, started.

Depending on how the title is virtualised and the efficiency of the virtualisation later the CPU hit may not be that high. Xbox One titles run on top of a hyper visor and the GPU is fully virtualised yet games do not have obscene extra requirements (sure, Xbox One cores run a tiny bit faster clockwise than PS4’s ones, but not that much more).

 

[Phatosaurus]

I don't think the DRM is a problem for how AC:O runs. It just seems to favour multithreading and a lot of cores, and a lot of people with 4c/4t systems are finding that out the hard way.

The gulf between the 4c/4t CPUs and 6c/12t+ CPUs says a lot. If anything, it's poorly optimised for 4c/4t systems, but optimised for systems above that threshold, even taking advantage of a CPU exceeding 8c/16t like the the Threadripper 1920x.

The 8700K has 6c/12t and a huge clockspeed advantage which really push it beyond the Ryzen CPUs, but that's evident in most, if not all games.


Can't say I'm a fan of Denuvo, but I can't say it has ever effecting me while playing a game either. AC:O is the only game I own that to my knowledge has Denuvo and it runs flawlessly at 1080p/60FPS on my system. Locked with RTSS, there's not even a hiccup in frame pacing or drops.

 

[hellishimp]

All i can say is thank you for Steam refund policy. This is the worst AC game i ever played. I think they are protecting the consumers fom a giant turd they made and i am thankful fo that !

 

[gatti-man]

It only hurts paying customers, it always gets cracked anyway, usually within a week these days.

If it costs me a few frames to make sure devs get paid for their work I’m more than happy to pay that price.

 

[Woo-Fu]

You say that it is definitely working but then say that there is no data to actually prove it for some relevant measures of success.

No I didn't. Read it again.

Don't confuse the DRM not being cracked with what effects that has upon sales of the title, or performance of the title from a hardware point of view.

 

[MultiCore]

If it costs me a few frames to make sure devs get paid for their work I’m more than happy to pay that price.

This is a fallacy.

If you would trade a little performance for a little security, you will lose both and deserve neither.

 

[Gamezone]

Why can't publishers just deal with the fact that someone will pirate their games? Unlike consoles, PC doesn't have used games,they have pirates. The amount of legit Steam users out there proves that people buy their games.

 

[Gormenghast]

Ubisoft's open world engine is very demanding on the CPU these days. You could see it in Watch Dogs 2 too. We're moving on to 16 threads in the high end, 4 threads have already caused bottlenecks in many games.

No.

The simulation is still identical on consoles that have extremely weak CPUs.

If CPUs that are magnitudes more powerful have problems to run the game it can only be because of DRM or poor PC code. There's no other option available.

 

[Rhetorical Question]

This game runs like shit on my i5 from 2014. Also the only game that I have trouble with. I don't know if it's the drm or just the game itself causing it, but I'm gonna do a refund since I can't enjoy it that way.

 

[I_dont_care]

With the news that Ubisoft's implementation of VMProtect on top of Denuvo is rumoured to increase processing usage (link here: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1456641), is it working?

They are also using the latest Denuvo, which is the latest 4.8, according to reddit. In comparison, South Park, another Ubisoft game, was cracked in a day when it had Denuvo 4.3.

I think having at least 2 weeks of not being cracked is going to have publishers looking at this implementation. The potential, impatient customers that would have pirated probably buckled and bought the game. I think Ubisoft made it work this time around, and the ramification for future game DRM is going to be interesting.

Everybody keeps saying it’s cracked in a day now but nier automata took months to crack and I know there are others that take more than a couple weeks

 

[DarkoMaledictus]

Its a good thing I haven't liked a Ubisoft game in ages...

 

[Gamezone]

Its a good thing I haven't liked a Ubisoft game in ages...

Me too, but the upcoming Far Cry game looks good

 

[gatti-man]

This is a fallacy.

If you would trade a little performance for a little security, you will lose both and deserve neither.

Yeah no. Stoping piracy does increase sales. That’s an indisputable fact, especially in the launch window. Ofcourse it’s not 1 for 1 or even 2 for 1 but the effect is there. The second part of your post is just lol worthy so I’ll ignore the miss use of quote.

 

[Fuz]

DRM are pointless and they've always been.

They're just a waste of money for the publishers. And a problem only for legitimate customers.

Yeah no. Stoping piracy does increase sales. That’s an indisputable fact, especially in the launch window. Ofcourse it’s not 1 for 1 or even 2 for 1 but the effect is there. The second part of your post is just lol worthy so I’ll ignore the miss use of quote.

Yeah, no.
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017...acy-doesnt-hurt-game-sales-may-actually-help/

 

[MultiCore]

Yeah no. Stoping piracy does increase sales. That’s an indisputable fact, especially in the launch window. Ofcourse it’s not 1 for 1 or even 2 for 1 but the effect is there. The second part of your post is just lol worthy so I’ll ignore the miss use of quote.

Miss use?

You can't even read.

Sacrificing performance in the name of DRM only leads to headaches for legitimate consumers. You'll never get that performance back, and you'll always be stuck with shitty restrictions on your legally purchased games.

Enjoy not being able to preserve anything, and maybe being able to repurchase it later, maybe not.

The number of devs that will remove DRM is low. The number that will shut down their activation servers is 100%.

 

[Ubername]

Umm, if the game doesn't sell well because of piracy, or even sells less, then it could mean less money for the studio, less money to pay workers.

Yes, it does have an impact. How much of an impact is something that we won't know.

Yes, we don't know. You can't say that the game didn't sell well because of piracy, you can't say that a pirated copy = a lost sale or that the pirate would have bought the game if not for the free version, and, that is to say:

You can't argue history. And even if you could, my point stands, the guys programming these games aren't poor lol. They're paid very well (very,very,very,very^n well) to do their jobs whether or not the game sells.

 

[prag16]

Whats wrong with that?

Tell me you're kidding.

 

[everyer]

I think it is great, as it works, you can see Chinese buyers did more contributions while in the past most of them download cracked games.

 

[ShdwDrake]

I'm pretty sure it's had the desired effect. I know that people are buying the game because they can't crack it.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Yes, we don't know. You can't say that the game didn't sell well because of piracy, you can't say that a pirated copy = a lost sale or that the pirate would have bought the game if not for the free version, and, that is to say:

You can't argue history. And even if you could, my point stands, the guys programming these games aren't poor lol. They're paid very well (very,very,very,very^n well) to do their jobs whether or not the game sells.

Some may make lots of money, most are overworked and make not nearly enough to repay the damage to their long term health and social life (no matter how much the team culture makes them feel like Navy Seals in warfare zones because they crunch for months and months)... also enjoy moving cities and countries a lot while chasing new jobs (hello studios’s boom and bust culture). Not as fun as it seems...

 

[WaterAstro]

We're closing in on a month, and it's still not cracked.

It actually might not be Ubisoft's Denuvo and VMProtect combo. Denuvo itself might be tough to crack with their latest update.

Just found this while looking around.

 

[Senua]

If it costs me a few frames to make sure devs get paid for their work I’m more than happy to pay that price.

hahahahahahahahaha

 

[Woo-Fu]

Why can't publishers just deal with the fact that someone will pirate their games?

They are dealing with it, you just don't care for their methodology.

 

[yurinka]

Why can't publishers just deal with the fact that someone will pirate their games?

Because they invest dozens or hundreds of millions on their games and want to be paid for their work. So they try to protect their titles.

 

[Carlius]

am ok with this. denuvo made me buy games and now i cant even fathom the thought of pirating. so keep at it baby.

 

[Storelle1]

This thread just goes to show, how much of these fake gamers depend on Piracy. Weird as you guys claim denuvo and other DRMs hurt CPU where I have never had an issue once with Drms especially on my shitty i5-2500 non-k.

Even the fx-6300 fares up well with every game i ever bought that has a drm. I mean the was that one game where I had an issue with the CPU but devs said it wasnt the DRM issue and patched it afterwards.


BUT BUT MUH PIRACY

 

[knerl]

From personal testing of two games utilizing Denuvo; Doom and Dishonored 2.
Doom after they removed Denuvo loads A LOT faster when booting the game. Dishonored 2 on PS4 doesn't have Denuvo and while being installed on a much slower machine and disk it still manages to load a lot faster than the PC counterpart installed on an Intel 600p m2 or a samsung 850 pro sitting in a much faster PC. During initialization of the game it sometimes boots fast, but most of the time it takes a lot longer. One would assume that this is due to Denuvo verifying the game files? The game is pretty big with plenty of individual files so it kind of confirms a heavy impact at least? To me this is not acceptable at all.
Superior CPU, superior storage, superior system memory and superior bandwidth should in no way take longer than on inferior hardware.

 

[Mr. Mister]

It’s weird. As we all know piracy doesn’t correlate with sales and that’s a clear fact. Yet these companies keep spending a lot of money putting in DRM. It’s so strange that they keep doing that.