-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
PC version of Inside seemingly using Denuvo
- Thread starter JaseC
- Start date
In a perfect world where Denuvo's business decisions were made solely to appease their customers, this would make sense. But reality does not work that way. Businesses make decisions considering many factors, including monetary expenses.
Here's an example:
Microsoft entered the console business with the original xbox. People supported them and they are still in the console business today. Yet in 2010, Microsoft shut down the OG Xbox live servers, so people playing xbox can no longer play online or access xbox live. If an xbox game relied on xbox live to do a drm check, it would be dead forever. No developer is going to go back and fix an old xbox game. It's not worth the expense, especially if the game is not generating much revenue.
So supporting a business does not guarantee their services will continue forever, regardless of whether or not they go out of business. Denuvo could roll out a new DRM system tomorrow and decide to shut off all the old denuvo servers if they felt like it, and we would be screwed if the game publisher decides fixing the game is not worth the extra development expense.
That's why people hate Denuvo/online DRM in general. I can play all my NES games today if I feel like it. Will I be able to play a denuvo game in 30 years? Well, if a multi billion dollar company couldn't keep xbox servers that long, I (and many others) doubt some little company will keep denuvo servers up.
I got one already. I have over 1200 games and got a warning that future refunds might be denied because I've asked for a significant amount of refunds. I went through my transactions and I've got 7 refunds total. That's a pretty arbitrary number to consider significant given my library size.
blame space
Banned
the game owns you guys are missing out
More_Badass
Member
Only 7 and you got that message? I've refunded quite a few games before that. It must be something they're adding to all refund messages now, rather than an actual warning related to how many refunds you've done
Stronghammer22
Member
For all the people saying "Good for them, it will lead to more sales" etc, there is no evidence that Denuvo leads to more sales. My belief is that DRM such as this only negatively impacts the paying customer, so it has no place. I will not buy a game that uses Denuvo DRM.
ScientificPizza
Banned
It may not increase sales, but it will ensure that the people who are playing the game are playing it legitimately
I'm curious to see if there is a higher percentage of sales for games with Denuvo on key reselling sites, because that could be a case were Denuvo is actively costing them money
omgwtfbentime
Member
Never understood the dunovo comparison to whole servers being out. Couldn't they theoretically remove dunovo much more easily? Not sure if compares to GFWL just due to the fact GFWL games had way more features than just a simple DRM check. I'm not supporting dunovo necessarily but I get why it's there and assuming when inside gets a DRM free release on gog or something the Steam version could easily be updated.
Huge Succeeded
Banned
smaller indie games are far more prone to day one piracy than most other games. they're smaller and easier to download, less complex to crack, and they'll run on a wide variety of systems. it's easy to say there's no evidence that denuvo will lead to more sales (as though the opposite opinion is somehow more substantiated) but i feel like it's pretty disingenuous, maybe even dishonest to hardline that stance - regardless of the approaches other indie devs and pubs have chosen to take re: drm. as far as I'm concerned, it's practically common sense, denuvo WILL grant them more sales - even if only five or ten percent of potential pirates would choose to actually buy the game in the end. it might not be the difference between survival for the dev house and going under, but that kind of money can still make a difference, where both the dev house's development capabilities and the team's quality of life are concerned.
i trust that these devs in particular are aware of how Denuvo is generally perceived (and if they weren't before they certainly will be now) and that even if Denuvo isn't patched out by them, the game will eventually be cracked and preserved as nearly all games have been in the past. and I'm personally able to empathize with their desire to avoid day-one piracy enough to accept the presence of Denuvo, which has never negatively impacted me before.
Incurring a cost to implement DRM and hurting legitimate users just to spite theoretical thieves seems like a pretty weak business decision.
ScientificPizza
Banned
I don't see how they're hurting legitimate users?
The Albatross
Member
Just finished it. It's the best game of 2016 and worth putting up with any DRM system for it.
I would put up with Gabe Newell sitting on my chest verifying my purchase by manually looking through my credit card receipts every time I go to launch the game just because it's so good, so original, so unique, and so expertly made.
I would put up with Gabe Newell sitting on my chest verifying my purchase by manually looking through my credit card receipts every time I go to launch the game just because it's so good, so original, so unique, and so expertly made.
johnnydrama
Banned
I think the perfect compromise here would be for the guys behind Denuvo to strike some sort of deal with game devs/pubs to release a patch some years down the line that dismantles the DRM.
Huge Succeeded
Banned
I don't see why when the overwhelming majority of users won't even notice the DRM solution in place here without it being explicitly pointed out to them.
well, there's the nebulous and substantiated yet unprecedented suggestion that one day you might not be able to access these games because of Denuvo, and the very real occasional inconvenience imparted upon a small pool of users who are unable to activate their Denuvo games for particular reasons. I like to think that even if devs don't choose to eventually patch Denuvo out of games for the sake of preservation, the Denuvo of today won't be a problem for the cracking teams of tomorrow. Does anyone have any examples of DRM that has truly stood the test of time? I've seen Bulletstorm mentioned here, like it can't be played today at all thanks to GFWL, but that game's effectively been preserved.
Scrooge McDuck
Member
Yar, I'm not actually arguing anything with that statement. It's just a "hey, I do!" moment. Sorry for the digression. That said...
People have bad experiences with software security measures and instances when a game couldn't be played anymore due to old anti-piracy magickery have already happened. No matter how benign Denuvo is in comparison, as long as there is a possibility of the same thing happening, of course it would be perceived as anti-consumer. Of course some would have objections.
I've never actually gotten any problem with DRMs and the likes, so I don't have any strong feeling about this. However, I can understand the apprehension and disappointment. The condescending and dismissive "it doesn't affect me and so I have no idea why those small minority would have problem with it" that some posters are displaying is honestly off-putting.
Fucking up my ability to play offline conveniently.
Hindering modding
If never gets cracked, it will eventually be unplayable.
How is it NOT hurting legitimate users?
I hope so because otherwise it was a bit rude....and probably illegal given the court case they lost in Australia where they agreed to comply with our consumer laws. I'm more than happy to pass it on to the ACCC if they want to push the issue though.
ThoughtsOfSpeaking
Banned
Good for them.
My attitude towards denuvo is pretty simple. If a game is going to add more hoops for me to jump through on PC, I may as well just buy it on console. PC gaming is enough hassle as it is, especially if you play offline occasionally.
I have more faith in a console ecosystem being around a decade from now than the servers of a third party anti-tampering solution.
My attitude towards denuvo is pretty simple. If a game is going to add more hoops for me to jump through on PC, I may as well just buy it on console. PC gaming is enough hassle as it is, especially if you play offline occasionally.
I have more faith in a console ecosystem being around a decade from now than the servers of a third party anti-tampering solution.
CecilRousso
Member
I'm sure it does.
The thing though is that there are tons of games that own. And when they're that many you struggle to keep up, it becomes very easy to put games, that moves towards this very nasty of continue to limit your ownership of your purchase even further, to the bottom of the priority list.
Because some of us don't like the idea that would should have to ask an arbitrary number of servers, more or less known, to permission to play our singleplayer games.
Not only because those kinds of server depencies limits our ownership and the freedom we expect with our purchase.
But also we because we know what has happened with these kind of systems before.
And because we have also seen the sales numbers that shows no indication of that Denuvo protected games gains a magical spike in sales.
But it also seems that a great number of people won't see this issues at all, or even acknowledge that there at least might be something worth discussing here, Because since it doesn't bother them, why should it bother anyone else?
Movalpolos
Banned
Honestly, I don't. The way Microsoft cuts their fat in regards to legacy hardware and software I consider all my 360 XBLA purchases to be money down the drain at this point. I'm so glad digital retail games were barely a thing last console generation because it would've been so much worse.
How odd, considering they're the only console company bringing forward purchases from that gen.
More_Badass
Member
So the only thing that matters is the player?
Genuinely curious, have there been any legit studies and research done on DRM and sales, and specifically Denuvo?
If two versions of a game were released, one with and without Denuvo, and the one with it sold much better comparatively, would you still be against such a system?
johnnydrama
Banned
Completely agree. I finished it on Xbox last week and it is fire. Y'all be robbing yourselves of a wonderful experience.
Also, I bought it again on Steam because it's just that good.
More_Badass
Member
Ha, ditto here. Well, I had preordered on Steam, then got it on Xbox so I could play it sooner. But I'm keeping the Steam preorder because it deserves the sale and it's one of the games I want on as many platforms as possible. It'll probably come to mobile in a few years
holygeesus
Banned
Yes, Denuvo. I own every single game protected by it and never had a problem with any of them.
I can maybe understand the potential problems it could cause in the future, but then people have thousands of games on Steam too. In a future hypothetical world they too could disappear and you would lose access.
In terms of actually playing the damn games now, I don't understand people saying 'Oh I'm gonna wait till a sale now' - it will still have the DRM then. You are just punishing yourself into not enjoying a game at launch and denying the devs their money, which is kinda the same as piracy, albeit on a much lesser scale.
The only people who should be upset about this are stinking pirates.
True that, still don't have faith in being able to use them in a decade.
ScientificPizza
Banned
I agree that the inability to mod at the moment is unfortunate, but I wouldn't classify that as hurting anyone
And the fact that games will become unplayable is conjecture. There is no way that all of these large developers would be adopting Denuvo if they didn't have a contingency plan for their servers going offline. That's just speculation and maybe your purchases shouldn't revolve entirely around doomsday what-ifs
VolticArchangel
Member
Yeah, I don't do lip service by preaching "OH NO! MY PRESERVATION!" like you. Yes, I care for for games being preserved for generations, if not more, and way more than YOU & your fake outcry on the internet - whether it suits your argument or not.
Which by all means is good. I don't even care if GOG takes over the majority of the market share in a few years and actually WANT that (though its borderline impossible). To quote and play your hide-behind-the-hivemind rhetoric, the only thing people here on NeoGAF wish is to kill software piracy (impossible) or deny it by a few months like Denuvo currently does for developers.
johnnydrama
Banned
I hope this game comes out on PS4 and mobile as soon as possible. I just want more people to experience it. Playdead have crafted one of my favorite games of this console gen.
CecilRousso
Member
Absolutely, as long as your one of the players that pay for your games, there is no reason that you should shoulder the responsibility of those who doesn't.
People have accepted the responsibility in quite a large scale with Steam but in that case Steam was the better alternative to the DRM schemes of the time when it really started to grow, and compensates the player with services that makes people want use it. Denuvo does no such thing.
Of course not, there can't be any such studies since publishers and devs won't publish sales figures if they doesn't show what they want to show.
What we have rely on are the available sales figures, and right now they show:
1. Completely DRM free games can sell massive numbers.
2. Denuvo protected games doesn't show a magical spike in sales compared to similiar games without Denuvo.
Has any dev or the team behind Denuvo itself addressed this? I feel like that's the main fear, and if there is a contingency plan anywhere that addresses it, everybody should be shouting from the rooftops.
Times may be changing, but I don't like the feeling that I'm not really getting the game, or even a personal license for the game, I'm just being loaned access to it. I'll continue to let the devs know I don't want that by not buying the game, and sending them feedback that indicates that. As I said above, if there's some kind of plan or guarantee in place I'll consider changing my stance, but the preservation argument is a major one (I've gone through 3 original Xbox's in the last two months to play Jet Set Radio: Future properly).
Huge Succeeded
Banned
I don't see why you'd expect them to, either. It would be impossible to actually determine the exact impact of utilizing Denuvo vs. not utilizing Denuvo, without opening up a portal to some sister universe where DRM doesn't exist at all, lmao. All we know is that there's an increasing number of pubs and devs who do see enough value in Denuvo to implement it at a cost, which doesn't exactly gel with this constant implication that there couldn't possibly be benefit to it.
In fact, threads like these leave me wondering why everyone is willing to acknowledge that it's impossible to actually get these metrics, until it ceases to benefit their argument, at which point they'll happily infer that Denuvo and other DRM solutions can't actually have any impact on sales at all. Usually thanks to the type of insane logic that dictates that nobody who's ever pirated would actually pay for a game if it was the only way to play it.
The only game that I've seen that had sales numbers that could potentially be attributed to Denuvo was Warhammer Total War. It had so much less hype than Rome 2 and a whole lot hindering it before launch (DLC and performance complaints), but it ended up selling the best in the series.
Normally I'd be against DRM because the problem in the past was that it simply didn't do anything other than fuck with legitimate consumers but Denuvo is seemingly pretty effective at stumping crack groups with minimal issue to legitimate consumers, so... Good for them. I hope this trend catches on for more indie devs to protect their work.
holygeesus
Banned
If it safeguards the future of indie game development then I'm all for it.
CecilRousso
Member
I would say that it's the most high profile game in the series, considering the IP they built it on, and they marketed the game really well, with tons of articles being written about it, numerous trailers and playthrough being released over a long time, with a heavy push on pre-order campaigns.
And it sells about the same, even slightly less, then XCOM2 - also a PC only (until this fall) strategy game with turnbased elements. And XCOM2 doesn't not have Denuvo.
There are a number of arguments I can see as to why Denuvo would be used, more then actual sales figures, but none of them are arguments I would accept as to reasons why paying customers should shoulder the responsibilities for what pirates does.
The sales figures argument is something I come back to, since quite a lot of people seem to think that it's the main one, considering that the talk is about the future of the developers, so it would should be a financial one.
Unless you're talking about the sadness over piracy making developers quit the business, rather then it being about their revenue.
holygeesus
Banned
We don't know how Denuvo impacts on sales figures on a game by game basis, but we *do* know just how many illegal copies of games are downloaded, and smaller indie games like this, suffer significantly from piracy.
If Denuvo safeguards their future then great.
Huge Succeeded
Banned
oh, I'm aware. I made a post about that above that will surely go ignored by insincere preservationists. I totally agree with you.
http://www.wsgf.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=95&t=29013&sid=63c0559ff9694aabe706e874f48546b4
I just find the most recent version in that thread. The game runs in 21:9 out of the box, but adds black bars during dialog. The fix just corrects that.
More_Badass
Member
1) Let's go with the hypothesis that Denuvo does in fact help indie devs. (Forget AAA games here, we're talking small debut projects or follow-ups like Inside). If it benefits players but hurts devs due to being easier/possible to pirate, you'd still support it?
2) Inside is the first indie game to use Denuvo or DRM? Usually indie devs tend to be more transparent about sales, often posting post mortems. Have other indie devs addressed DRM and sales?
ScientificPizza
Banned
Not that I've seen, which you're right, if they just came
out ahead of that stuff I'm sure it would change a lot of people's perceptions. Game preservation is obviously a very important thing, so anything that even seemingly hinders that is going to be met with opposition from a section of the audience.
But I can see where developers are coming from with using is as well. This isn't just about preservation or online/offline convenience. The sales of a game, especially at launch, is incredibly important to the livelihoods of the people making them. I don't see how you can see people trying to protect that from theft as an inherently bad thing. We know that game piracy is a bad thing that can actively hurt a developer. And while Denuvo implementation might not immediately increase the sales of a game, I just find it unfathomable that anyone would fault someone for protecting it.
Movalpolos
Banned
This thread is a perfect example of why I don't get along with most of the hardcore PC evangelist userbase.
Huge Succeeded
Banned
I simply don't believe that the financial impact of piracy should be presented as a false dichotomy: "Sales Success vs. Going Under". And if a talented dev house like PlayDead is able to sell even ten thousand more copies through the inclusion of Denuvo, with that additional revenue seeing its way to the team members who worked so hard on the game, improving their quality of life and/or improving their capabilities as a dev house, then I'm one of those people who'd happily accept the burden, which FOR ME has proven to be completely inconsequential. I know I don't speak for everyone, but that's how I feel (I consider that standpoint to be the empathetic one - I feel it's perfectly reasonable for me as a paying customer to compromise in this manner for those reasons), and I'm completely unafraid of Denuvo permanently blocking access to these games because I simply don't expect it to hold up against time and against dedicated cracking teams as technology advances. Be it one year from now or five, Denuvo games will be playable without pinging Denuvo servers.
I'd be more comfortable with Denuvo if it were a standard, controlled by a consortium of Publishers, akin to the way Ultraviolet works for digital movies. If they all had an incentive to keep it alive, the chance of "the servers shutting off" would be pretty unlikely. It isn't pretty and I'd rather we all be able to enjoy a drm free utopia where no one steals and IP is preserved forever.
That said, if i were an Indie Dev, my primary concern would be survival, after years of effort and likely going into quite a bit of debt to finish a work, I'd hope to hell i could sell as many copies as I could while the game is new/hot. Preservation of history would not even enter my mind, only minimizing the backlash from a development like this. Love your community, but verify that you're gettin' paid.
That said, if i were an Indie Dev, my primary concern would be survival, after years of effort and likely going into quite a bit of debt to finish a work, I'd hope to hell i could sell as many copies as I could while the game is new/hot. Preservation of history would not even enter my mind, only minimizing the backlash from a development like this. Love your community, but verify that you're gettin' paid.