General News - Denuvo DRM on the Rise

We don't have hard data. We have instead multiple actual situations and trends that together can point to a fairly accurate situation. I already said some people would of course buy certain games if forced. But most would not. They simply won't play that particular game. People that have always pirated are not among your customers as a publisher. They're not lost sales.






Thats incorect on all accounts. First, we don't have actual sale numbers, konami din't provide any. We only know Konamy shiped 5 million copies to retailers. those are not sold, those are the copies that sit on shelves and in storage. Second, this is about the PC sales, not consoles. Since we now have Steamspy, we know the game sits at cca 850 000 copies. Low to moderate sales. A game with no crack, from a world known franchise. The people that normally buy games, went and bought the game, the pirates just played something else, they didn't go and purchase the game. I already said its easy to monitor pirate forums. This game was non existent in forum conversations. Why? Because there was no crack and no people that bought it legitimately. Therefore no one has played the game.







Aaaah, thats not how it works. When games say they sold millions it's usually a good sign. It was a PC only role playing game with high system requirements. Yet it sold millions, each of the first two games. Would it have sold better with aggresive drm? Maybe 50k more copies. Maybe more. Maybe less. We don't know. What we do know is that its one of the most succesful franchises around, being practically available for free. Thats because as i've said multiple times now, people that buy games don't care about cracks and pirate sites and so on.

Another recent example, Dragons Dogma. A review copy leaked a week early on the internet. Another free game, one week in advance, before it hits stores. Yet the game is last weeks best selling game on steam, and probably recuped its measly porting costs ten fold.

You agree we don't have any hard numbers but then insist that the numbers are low based on reading torrent forums. Not sure thats really a reliable system.

I agree publisher blow piracy out of proportion but many gamers under estimate its impact. I think as usual the truth would lie somewhere in the middle.

We'll just have to agree to disagree, I guess.
 
Your character data is saved on your PC. But your game.exe gives powers, not data. Nothing runs on the server except map info in/out. Whatever your own game.exe does, server will accept as "legit".
Further reading: how to cheat in Maple Story.

Sorry joxer but that is completely false for the vast majority of "real" MMOs (as opposed to "normal" multiplayer games... and I have a feeling that you are mixing these terms rather willy-nilly ;) ).
For MMOs, the character data and inventory is naturally stored on the game servers and can not be tampered with. The only local data (except engine, art assets etc.) is usually only UI settings and general customization options.
Cheats for "real" MMOs are mostly bug exploits (of server-side faults) or in very rare cases tampering with the data exchange between the client and the server but I can not recall a high profile MMO in recent history where that ever happened because the data is either encrypted or simply impossible to abuse the client-side stream if the server-side piece of the puzzle is missing.
 
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
3,201
What people have missed in this thread is that there is a reason why major game publishers like Bethesda and the GTA publishers have not used Denuvo. That reason is obvious.

First, there is a cost associated with Denuvo. Second the game publishers will also lose some sales because of Denuvo (either because of higher game sales price due to Denuvo royalties and/or because of poorer game performance resulting from Denuvo).

Here's how things actually work in the business world -- decisions are made on the basis of cost/benefit analyses in virtually all instances. So if at the end of the day, use of Denuvo has benefits that outweigh the costs then publishers use it; but if cost outweigh the benefit, publishers do not use it.

The status today is that big publishers and huge games have not used Denuvo. Three guesses why (and the answer clearly is not "because the publishers don't care if they lose sales to so-called pirates.") Instead it is obvious that publishers have determined that profits will not justify Denuvo cost.

Probably a part of this is because of poorer game performance (or consumer perceived poorer game performance). Regardless of what Denuvo claims, and what Bioware claimed in the past; no one has ever shown any test data showing that game with Denuvo performs same as game without Denuvo. Should be an easy test to perform. But Bioware didn't do it (claimed they didn't have and couldn't make copies without Denuvo -- yeah, right), and Denuvo hasn't done it.

As to Denuvo not writing to the hard drive; that really doesn't mean anything if in fact Denuvo causes the game to write more and/or differently to the hard disk. Clearly there were plenty of game purchasers who noticed their hard drives functioning differently with Denuvo games. But Oh! It was just their imagination; right? Probably not right. But at any rate, if the customer doesn't buy a Denuvo game because of Denuvo fears, the result is the same.

DAI had all kinds of customer performance complaints BTW. Supposedly was just coincidence. Sorry but I don't buy that. I don't believe the ridiculous Denuvo claims of no game impact; and I (like many other consumers) will never buy a Denuvo game.

__
 
What people have missed in this thread is that there is a reason why major game publishers like Bethesda and the GTA publishers have not used Denuvo. That reason is obvious.

First, there is a cost associated with Denuvo. Second the game publishers will also lose some sales because of Denuvo (either because of higher game sales price due to Denuvo royalties and/or because of poorer game performance resulting from Denuvo).

Here's how things actually work in the business world -- decisions are made on the basis of cost/benefit analyses in virtually all instances. So if at the end of the day, use of Denuvo has benefits that outweigh the costs then publishers use it; but if cost outweigh the benefit, publishers do not use it.

The status today is that big publishers and huge games have not used Denuvo. Three guesses why (and the answer clearly is not "because the publishers don't care if they lose sales to so-called pirates.") Instead it is obvious that publishers have determined that profits will not justify Denuvo cost.

Probably a part of this is because of poorer game performance (or consumer perceived poorer game performance). Regardless of what Denuvo claims, and what Bioware claimed in the past; no one has ever shown any test data showing that game with Denuvo performs same as game without Denuvo. Should be an easy test to perform. But Bioware didn't do it (claimed they didn't have and couldn't make copies without Denuvo -- yeah, right), and Denuvo hasn't done it.

As to Denuvo not writing to the hard drive; that really doesn't mean anything if in fact Denuvo causes the game to write more and/or differently to the hard disk. Clearly there were plenty of game purchasers who noticed their hard drives functioning differently with Denuvo games. But Oh! It was just their imagination; right? Probably not right. But at any rate, if the customer doesn't buy a Denuvo game because of Denuvo fears, the result is the same.

DAI had all kinds of customer performance complaints BTW. Supposedly was just coincidence. Sorry but I don't buy that. I don't believe the ridiculous Denuvo claims of no game impact; and I (like many other consumers) will never buy a Denuvo game.

__


I've got hundreds of hours in denuvo games on my 3 year old SSD's and they are still going strong. Years of life left according to Samsung software. Coincidence ?, I think not.

Many, many non denuvo games have performance complaints BTW. Coincidence? Again, I think not.

Not trying to champion denuvo but I think many people have problems with games and immediately want to blame DRM. Btw, Arkham knight would have supported your position better. It uses denuvo. Just in case you ran out of ammo against it.;)
 
I've got hundreds of hours in denuvo games on my 3 year old SSD's and they are still going strong. Years of life left according to Samsung software. Coincidence ?, I think not.

Many, many non denuvo games have performance complaints BTW. Coincidence? Again, I think not.

Not trying to champion denuvo but I think many people have problems with games and immediately want to blame DRM. Btw, Arkham knight would have supported your position better. It uses denuvo. Just in case you ran out of ammo against it.;)

Be that as it may, some complex DRM schemes do and have harmed game performance as a historical matter. And that is not at all surprising with the situation that you point out to effect that games by their very nature often have performance problems in the best of circumstances.

Take that one step further and ask what you expect when you start significant DRM modifications to a game system that is difficult to get to work well for all users on numerous systems to begin with. Pretty obvious answer. Pretty good chance you are going to muck something up when you try to add complexity to an already-highly-complex-software/performance balanced game.

Edit -- Fact of the matter is that some publishers like CD Project Red, openly acknowledge that DRM causes problems for legitimate purchasers. It's just the way it is -- no surprise to anyone really.

__
 
Numerous times that DRM caused me a lot of unecessary trouble with legitimate game copies.
Medieval 2 Total War refusing to run because i had Nero installed.
Grand Theft Auto 4 and various other GamesForWindowsLive games refusing to either install or run.
Galactic Civilizations 2 requiring 3 different accounts(including a Gamestop account)via their Impulse client just to download an update.
And let's not even mention always online DRM trash like EA's Sim City,that have brought down Maxis.
In all those cases i would be better off with a pirated copy of a game,instead these companies treat their customers as thieves and make us go throught loops to utilize what we have already bought.
I say they can keep their games and their precious DRM and i'll stick with GOG.
 
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
88
Numerous times that DRM caused me a lot of unecessary trouble with legitimate game copies.
Medieval 2 Total War refusing to run because i had Nero installed.
Grand Theft Auto 4 and various other GamesForWindowsLive games refusing to either install or run.
Galactic Civilizations 2 requiring 3 different accounts(including a Gamestop account)via their Impulse client just to download an update.
And let's not even mention always online DRM trash like EA's Sim City,that have brought down Maxis.
In all those cases i would be better off with a pirated copy of a game,instead these companies treat their customers as thieves and make us go throught loops to utilize what we have already bought.
I say they can keep their games and their precious DRM and i'll stick with GOG.

Well, your post is nice and all, but it has nothing to do with this topic. As mentioned already in this thread Denuvo, is a none intrusive DRM, it doesn't stop you from running the game if you have NERO installed, or a scratched game CD or whatever. It just let's you run the game and not pirates. The breaking of SSD disks was already debunked as well.

GOG is nice, but it makes things very easy for pirates, many people tend to forget that those pirates sites makes a lot of money, and not a small part of that money goes to criminals, so a none crackable game is great for the purpose that it reduces crime as well.
 
Joined
Oct 25, 2006
Messages
6,292
@GothicGothicness
"GOG is nice,but it makes things very easy for pirates" really?
I never thought of it that way.They only thing i have thought is "Your DRM might put shareholders at ease but it makes my life harder".
Don't you worry,companies -especially big ones - always find ways to protect their interests often at the expense of their customers and pirates will do their thing no matter what in the end.
And for your information i was only able to run Medieval Toatal War 2 without unistalling NERO just because of a crack some "criminal" made and not because of Sega,that threw corporate talk at me when i contacted them.
 
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
88
@GothicGothicness
"GOG is nice,but it makes things very easy for pirates" really?
I never thought of it that way.They only thing i have thought is "Your DRM might put shareholders at ease but it makes my life harder".
Don't you worry,companies -especially big ones - always find ways to protect their interests often at the expense of their customers and pirates will do their thing no matter what in the end.
And for your information i was only able to run Medieval Toatal War 2 without unistalling NERO just because of a crack some "criminal" made and not because of Sega,that threw corporate talk at me when i contacted them.

I am not defending something like Securom, which prevented you from running games because you had NERO installed. It was horrible, and I am not defending any such a DRM. But Denuvo does not do that, it simply prevents the exe from being altered, I don't see how none pirates would have a problem with that.
 
Joined
Oct 25, 2006
Messages
6,292
I never wrote anything about Denuvo because i have no experience with it whatsoever.
Although i can tell you that i don't like programs that stay on my system without my permission and it is not known what they do exactly.
Peace.
 
Joined
Sep 14, 2012
Messages
88
I am not defending something like Securom, which prevented you from running games because you had NERO installed. It was horrible, and I am not defending any such a DRM. But Denuvo does not do that, it simply prevents the exe from being altered, I don't see how none pirates would have a problem with that.

There are lots and lots of reports from Denuvo users that strongly disagree with assertions that Denuvo has no negative impact on gaming. Take a look at how Denuvo is supposed to work -- its complicated and breaks the exe file into lots of small pieces - it operates very rapidly preventing a monitoring system from getting info about the exe file -- no question that such a software would place an overhead on the system during game operation. Any claim to the contrary is flat-out ridiculous. Such a process clearly has to use system resources; otherwise it woud be a non-operational process.

There is no real world question whether any resident, full time computer operation places an overhead on the system. This is elementary. You cannot run any process at zero cost without violating the rules of physics. The only question is the extent of resource useage. Denuvo provides no real world data as to the actual burden it places on your system during use.

Any additional process added to a complex game that is already straining a user's system will slow down the game. That's why gaming sites recommend stopping all unnecessary resident programs during game play to get better performance.

Denuvo has a cost just like every other program on your system. Based on reports of how Denuvo works, that cost is probably pretty high. Users with fast multicore cpus, tons of excess memory, fast ssds, expensive motherboards designed for gaming, and top of the line GPUs probably will see little impact. But others will definitely see a negative impact -- so long as they are using their computer in the real world that relies on real physics for existence.

__
 
Denuvo has a cost just like every other program on your system.
It sure does. 1% - max. Depending on exe size.

Based on reports of how Denuvo works, that cost is probably pretty high. Users with fast multicore cpus, tons of excess memory, fast ssds, expensive motherboards designed for gaming, and top of the line GPUs probably will see little impact. But others will definitely see a negative impact -- so long as they are using their computer in the real world that relies on real physics for existence.
No.
Only users who're trying to run something on a machine below minimum requirements will see an impact. But that's not because Denuvo.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
23,459
It sure does. 1% - max. Depending on exe size.


No.
Only users who're trying to run something on a machine below minimum requirements will see an impact. But that's not because Denuvo.

Where did you get the 1% max number? This is incredibly hard to believe. Even the best encryption process available today -- and which rely on hardware for encryption -- have single digit percentage costs that typically approach 10%. If your 1% max number is true, it should be very easy to document. Link?

As to your assertion that only when a user is running below minimum hardware requirements will they see any impact; that's ridiculous. Take a look at Fallout 4 for example. Bethesda keeps issuing patches to improve memory use and game play speed. And Fallout 4 is simply not a demanding game.

The point is that minimum hardware requirements allow a game to run -- but they do not mean the game will run at max speed, or even run well.

There is never some absolute black-and-white minimum hardware requirement that users can rely on for perfect game performance. It's always a continuum. The better the hardware thee more you can do. But every extra process will come at a cost.

Any obfuscation process that continually interferes with execution of an exe file so as to hide all info on that file has to have a relatively high cost.

__
 
Where did you get the 1% max number? This is incredibly hard to believe. Even the best encryption process available today -- and which rely on hardware for encryption -- have single digit percentage costs that typically approach 10%. If your 1% max number is true, it should be very easy to document. Link?
You're asking me the link to disproof your sorry to say but paranoia based on no link? :)

Any type of today's encryption is just a set of a few basic mathematical expressions. The rest of it is load/store data. Forget the hardware encryption, this is not 1941. Any modern CPU can outrun hundreds of hardware encryptors.

It also seems to me that you're mixing encryption/decryption with compression/decompression which is not the same thing. Fallout 4 seems to use some odd (de)compression of data which causes huge loadtimes if game is on HDD. But it's not encryption. I'm not 100% sure the data format is the cause, but other than that I can't think of any other possible explanation.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
23,459
You're asking me the link to disproof your sorry to say but paranoia based on no link? :)

Any type of today's encryption is just a set of a few basic mathematical expressions. The rest of it is load/store data. Forget the hardware encryption, this is not 1941. Any modern CPU can outrun hundreds of hardware encryptors.

It also seems to me that you're mixing encryption/decryption with compression/decompression which is not the same thing. Fallout 4 seems to use some odd (de)compression of data which causes huge loadtimes if game is on HDD. But it's not encryption. I'm not 100% sure about this but other than that I can't think of any other possible explanation.

If you can prove your 1% assertion, you can easily provide data. Otherwise your 1% claim is a groundless claim with nothing to back it up. Claims with nothing to back them up are worthless in the real world. In the world of science people run tests to reach reliable determinations of how things operate.

At any rate if you cannot back up your claim then its unreliable by definition. (The alternative is "Oh! I know that Denuvo has no more than 1% cost because anonymous forum poster going by the handle 'joxer' says so, with no proof whatsoever.")

__
 
No I can't prove anything. I don't have denuvo source code.
All I can do is based on my knowledge predict how hard encryption code would be for a machine. For all we know, Denuvo could be the simple XOR with some codeword on whole exe data. It's pisspoor encryption but it'd take probably less than 0.01% performance and would still be not crackable for months without byte by byte reverse engineering.

The proof needs to come from you, not from me. Because I'm the one saying there is no place for panic. ;)
You say 10%, sorry, but we're talking about PC here, not phone SoCs. There is absolutely no way encryption would hammer the PC that hard, even if it was Ubisoft's unoptimized code.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
23,459
No I can't prove nothing. I don't have denuvo source code.
All I can do is based on my knowledge predict how hard encryption code would be for a machine. For all we know, Denuvo could be the simple XOR with some codeword on whole exe data. It's pisspoor encryption but it'd take probably less than 0.01% performance and would still be not crackable for months without byte by byte reverse engineering.

The proof needs to come from you, not from me. Because I'm the one saying there is no place for panic. ;)
You say 10%, sorry, but we're talking about PC here, not phone SoCs. There is absolutely no way encryption would hammer the PC that hard, even if it was Ubisoft's unoptimized code.

Microsoft itself says Bitlocker has a single digit cost. Regardless of your belief, I think that Microsoft does know a little bit about computers. And "single digit" by definition means up to but not including 10%.

I've used and tested numerous encryption systems. They all have a very real cost even on a fast system with lots of ram (I have 24 gigs of fast ram; an eight core processor; and an excellent motherboard). If you hit as low as a 5% performance cost you're doing great. And encryption btw is implemented as a multi-stepped looped continuous process.

Moreover encryption will only protect data at rest. If you allow someone (or something) access to your system while encryption is running they can easily get your encryption key from system memory. There are several available programs to do just that. Do a little research and you'll find that every encryption expert will tell you that you must prevent access to system while encryption is running or encryption is not secure.

For Denuvo to somehow hide a key in operating memory while the process is running and when the key is being used; its safe to say that this simply cannot be done at some near zero cost.

__
 
If you can prove your 1% assertion, you can easily provide data. Otherwise your 1% claim is a groundless claim with nothing to back it up. Claims with nothing to back them up are worthless in the real world.

__

This is true which makes me wonder why you keep posting walls of text with nothing to back them up.

With all the hacker groups trying to crack and discredit denuvo if there was concrete proof you easily be able to find it and post it.
 
Bitlocker
Yea it all sounds great if you don't work as support and then frequently have to reset TPM chip just because. Also, bitlocker encryption by default uses US keyboard, so a user on QWERTZ ot AZERTY keyboard will hate it's guts especially if uses characters that are not from USA 24 letters set.
Bitlocker was promising feature but it's implementation IMO is horrible.

Yes I'm saying Microsoft failed. Like it's their first time.
This is true which makes me wonder why you keep posting walls of text with nothing to back them up.

With all the hacker groups trying to crack and discredit denuvo if there was concrete proof you easily be able to find it and post it.
I'm not sure about this either. The best piracy public secret today is that there is a way to still play a game after it being refunded on Steam. Dunno about Origin refunds, just heard, never read details, didn't care. But apparently, no cracks needed, means who cares if it was Denuvoed or not.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
23,459
This is true which makes me wonder why you keep posting walls of text with nothing to back them up.

With all the hacker groups trying to crack and discredit denuvo if there was concrete proof you easily be able to find it and post it.

Concrete proof of what? It's Denuvo, not me, trying to sell a product based on ridiculous claims.

DRM on games has a long history that tells us it always comes with a cost. What is it that you don't believe about game publishers wuch as CD Projekt Red claims that game DRM hurts legitimate users?

It's Denuvo's burden to establish their claims if they want to sell a product. That's just the way it is with any product in the market place.

A wise buyer should always examine product claims or expect to get burned.

__
 
Back
Top Bottom