So basically their whole thing boils down to “The people who don’t like us are the people we’re trying to stop anyway, and everyone else is just wrong when they don’t like us.” When challenged on things like performance impacts they insist that they can’t provide metrics, because it would be difficult to get permission, and even if they did nobody would believe them anyway. Any time a third party provides those metrics, though, those are lies because those third parties are all pirates. So again, everyone who doesn’t like Denuvo is actually just wrong, at least according to Denuvo.
This effort at defending themselves is just so hilariously bad. Not only did they utterly fail to make themselves look any better in any way, the absolute shallowness of their answers makes them look so much worse.
Fuck Denuvo, absolute bunch of clowns, the lot of them.
Stupid fuckin gamers and their “standards” and all of their complaining about “poor performance” because we’re basically requiring they run the game in a virtual machine that constantly stops to check if it’s pirated
“Gamers”? Who else do they think is even going to encounter their shit? If the people that are forced to endure your shit aren’t happy, seems like a you problem.
Ullman’s argumentation is very wiggly when it comes to impact on performance. On one hand, he claims there’s very little proof, on the other hand he claims there is no point producing proof because they wouldn’t be believed. Furthermore he says their hands are tied as they’d need their client’s approval to publish such numbers, conveniently ignoring the possibility of anonymizing and grouping data. Remember they state to being included in 70-80 games yearly.
Finally, and this is an old song, but anyways: preventing loss in sales due to piracy is an exercise in wishful thinking. The amount of pirate players who would have paid in an alternate universe with no cracked version can’t be reliably estimated.
… he claims there is no point producing proof because they wouldn’t be believed.
He also dismisses any evidence created by others as untrustworthy.
What a load of shit. It’s up to the person making the claim to provide evidence. People have claimed the opposite, and backed it up with “low-quality” evidence. Refusing it would be pretty easy, if it were true; get someone independent to verify in a pre-funded, blind trial.
The only reason not to do this is because they know their product reduces framerate frequently enough to be a problem.
I saw a thread last week of PC gamers saying red dead for PC is gonna cost too much so they will just pirate it.
Honestly as a dev I would avoid PC as a platform, the fanbase is unpleasable and no matter how much they argue that it’s not true, 1 third of PC gamers openly admit to pirating instead of buying.
I also find PC gamers are becoming a toxic group, they hate everyone
Especially knowing mobile revenue is all just pay to win whale hunting and gambling addiction. There’s no reason games like Pokémon can’t exist on mobile. But they’ll never do it. And if they do it’s gonna have in game currency.
Honest explanation of perspective from a PC gamer deciding weather or not to buy a game I think a dev should know:
According to the game’s Epic Games Store listing, Red Dead Redemption will cost $49.99/ £39.99 on PC, despite first being released in 2010.
I don’t think a game I played over 10 years ago is worth paying $40 again without some good value added to it. What makes this worth $40 to me as a consumer who enjoyed the original? I don’t see enough value to justify it.
It’s also a coin flip if the port is good, functional, or will have arbitrary technical limitations like no modding. I also don’t want to get screwed over and inconvenienced like the last time I gave them money. They are removing value from an over priced product by slowing it down and treating you like.
If I think a game is worth pirating, I am most likely willing to buy it or a future product from that dev if the situation was different or the product was better. Hell, I pirate games I intend to buy to make sure there not absolute dog shit and technically functional. I personally don’t thing its worth pirating Red Dead even without DRM, I already played it years back and I suspect Rockstar will make this version worse than the original knowing how they done things in the past.
I’m assuming I’m going to have to create an account, consent to spying, not own anything, install additional software to allow me to login and launch the game since they don’t like the one I choose, figure out compatibility, be exposed to predatory monetization, install a root kit to make sure I’m not bypassing monetization or cheating, worse performance, wave legal rights to contracts, deal with too little or too much moderation, and it still may be a turd that disappears 5 years alter after all of that. None of this is fun and removes value form the fun I would expect to purchase. I’m offended they think any of this shit is good. This is what will get PC players to hate your business. If you do this crap and you can only justify it to share holders and not customers, I want you to fail.
Corporate developers make games as an investment product and not a creative product. Denuvo is in the business as a designated ball squeezer that takes the reputational heat for a greedy dev that needs 0.3% on profit chart. We are not Denuvos customers. Denuvos customers are soulless board members creating investor profit by betting their reputation is still good enough to start enshitifying without immediately getting customers to jump ship.
Having a talking head come out once a week to make an offical statement calling people literally every insult in the book for saying “Game looks like shit and this dev has a track record of being shitty, save your money” is going to start a fight.
As a PC gamer, I only pirate games I don’t know whether I’m going to like or not. And even then, most of the time I’ll probably end up buying the game later if it’s available on Steam or GoG if I actually like the game, so I can support the devs. I personally don’t have the time to buy a game on Steam, play for less than 2 hours to find out whether I like it, and get a refund if I don’t.
1 third of PC gamers openly admit to pirating instead of buying.
Source? My sample size is small, but out of my entire group(maybe 11 people) exactly one pirates PC games. I’d be shocked if 1/3 of gamers in general were pirating stuff with any kind of regularity.
If you’re including pirating console games to play via emulation that number jumps drastically, though.
I just don’t see how this type of statistic is attractive to a company who wants to sell games. Gamers may not like it but to a business executive, that’s a scary number.
consoles have pretty much eliminated pirating. It’s certainly not as easy to do as it was back in the pre online days with a PS1 PS2, etc.
I get downvoted but I’m trying to look at this through the eyes of capitalism and it doesn’t work.
Lemmy likes to shoot the messenger. PC gamers asked why devs ignore them, here’s why.
I’m just looking at the PCGamer article- I don’t have a Statista account and I’m guessing the only source for that is the PCGamer article anyways because the numbers are the exact same.
There’s ~46,000 response that reported income there, and 22217 of them reported making less than $10,000. Another 9179 said less than $25000. I don’t think this is going to be indicative of gamers in general based off of just that.
Across the board the most common reasons were ‘demo game’, which would likely end up resulting in a sale anyways, and ‘can’t afford’ which would likely not result in a sale regardless of the ability to pirate.
But you’re right that I could absolutely see an exec reading that article, looking at a chart and losing his mind.
I’m not well versed in how Denuvo works, only in how it tanks performance. Does anyone know if there is anything stopping Denuvo from checking purchase validity the first time, and on subsequent game launches it can access a secure folder with a file like an internet cookie saying “yeah, this game was bought legit at one point, let it run” and then not run alongside the game?
That would be entirely too easily bypassed. Also, afaik, it’s kinda what Denuvo does when it’s offline. You can take a file from a legitimate install- I don’t know how/which one- and put it in a pirated copy and Denuvo will work fine… for two days. Then the little certificate or w.e. expires, and you’ve gotta get another one.
Lmao it’s kinda hilarious, because all the positive PR in the world isn’t going to fix the fact that they’re a shit company with a shit product that only makes products it’s used on worse. Do as much investor spin as you want - that fact will never change, and you’ll still be hated.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
No Let’s Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates.
(Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources.
If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
So basically their whole thing boils down to “The people who don’t like us are the people we’re trying to stop anyway, and everyone else is just wrong when they don’t like us.” When challenged on things like performance impacts they insist that they can’t provide metrics, because it would be difficult to get permission, and even if they did nobody would believe them anyway. Any time a third party provides those metrics, though, those are lies because those third parties are all pirates. So again, everyone who doesn’t like Denuvo is actually just wrong, at least according to Denuvo.
This effort at defending themselves is just so hilariously bad. Not only did they utterly fail to make themselves look any better in any way, the absolute shallowness of their answers makes them look so much worse.
Fuck Denuvo, absolute bunch of clowns, the lot of them.
So they have a great reputation with people who aren’t gamers?
Yeah, the C level execs!
Ah yes definitely not because their shit software hinders performance
Deluduvo
Stupid fuckin gamers and their “standards” and all of their complaining about “poor performance” because we’re basically requiring they run the game in a virtual machine that constantly stops to check if it’s pirated
“Gamers”? Who else do they think is even going to encounter their shit? If the people that are forced to endure your shit aren’t happy, seems like a you problem.
deleted by creator
The problem are Customers, who don’t just accept things that bring zero benefits for them whilst making their life worse.
But worry not, Denuvo does a great job at getting rid of those.
Denuvo’s customers are corporations, not consumers. “We had a poor reputation because of gamers. CEOs who aren’t gamers love us!”
Well, I meant it in the sense of End-Customers.
As you rightly point out Denuvo’s own Customers are other companies.
That’s funny bc it seems their entire job is to steal data and slow down game cracks by a small amount.
Is this a real gaming news website? Seems sketch af. There was another article posted from here yesterday that also looked questionable.
PaperRockShotgun has an article https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/denuvo-respond-to-their-rep-for-tanking-games-im-a-gamer-myself-and-therefore-i-know-what-im-talking-about
It’s called RockShotgunPaper
No. It’s RockgunShotpaper
It called IdontEverGoThereSoWhatDoIKnow.edu
I mean, they are right.
Just not in the way they think.
Ullman’s argumentation is very wiggly when it comes to impact on performance. On one hand, he claims there’s very little proof, on the other hand he claims there is no point producing proof because they wouldn’t be believed. Furthermore he says their hands are tied as they’d need their client’s approval to publish such numbers, conveniently ignoring the possibility of anonymizing and grouping data. Remember they state to being included in 70-80 games yearly.
Finally, and this is an old song, but anyways: preventing loss in sales due to piracy is an exercise in wishful thinking. The amount of pirate players who would have paid in an alternate universe with no cracked version can’t be reliably estimated.
He also dismisses any evidence created by others as untrustworthy.
What a load of shit. It’s up to the person making the claim to provide evidence. People have claimed the opposite, and backed it up with “low-quality” evidence. Refusing it would be pretty easy, if it were true; get someone independent to verify in a pre-funded, blind trial.
The only reason not to do this is because they know their product reduces framerate frequently enough to be a problem.
Die mad about it. ☠️
Lets blame 100% of the demographic we are fucking over. No wonder they get along so well with big devs.
I mean they aren’t wrong, due to piracy we know how awful the performance impact of Denuvo on games is (^:
I saw a thread last week of PC gamers saying red dead for PC is gonna cost too much so they will just pirate it.
Honestly as a dev I would avoid PC as a platform, the fanbase is unpleasable and no matter how much they argue that it’s not true, 1 third of PC gamers openly admit to pirating instead of buying.
I also find PC gamers are becoming a toxic group, they hate everyone
User Nuke_the_whales doesn’t like how toxic PC gamers are.
Nah, they should ditch consoles, the money is in PC anyways…
Sounds stupid, doesn’t it?
This is depressing.
Isn’t it though?
Especially knowing mobile revenue is all just pay to win whale hunting and gambling addiction. There’s no reason games like Pokémon can’t exist on mobile. But they’ll never do it. And if they do it’s gonna have in game currency.
Is this saying the most money is in vr? That’s the only part of this that is surprising to me.
Edit: Wait no, I think it’s just a confusing graph. It’s definitely all in mobile
No, majority of the money is in Mobile is how I read it… size of the spreads and all.
Honest explanation of perspective from a PC gamer deciding weather or not to buy a game I think a dev should know:
I don’t think a game I played over 10 years ago is worth paying $40 again without some good value added to it. What makes this worth $40 to me as a consumer who enjoyed the original? I don’t see enough value to justify it.
It’s also a coin flip if the port is good, functional, or will have arbitrary technical limitations like no modding. I also don’t want to get screwed over and inconvenienced like the last time I gave them money. They are removing value from an over priced product by slowing it down and treating you like.
If I think a game is worth pirating, I am most likely willing to buy it or a future product from that dev if the situation was different or the product was better. Hell, I pirate games I intend to buy to make sure there not absolute dog shit and technically functional. I personally don’t thing its worth pirating Red Dead even without DRM, I already played it years back and I suspect Rockstar will make this version worse than the original knowing how they done things in the past.
I’m assuming I’m going to have to create an account, consent to spying, not own anything, install additional software to allow me to login and launch the game since they don’t like the one I choose, figure out compatibility, be exposed to predatory monetization, install a root kit to make sure I’m not bypassing monetization or cheating, worse performance, wave legal rights to contracts, deal with too little or too much moderation, and it still may be a turd that disappears 5 years alter after all of that. None of this is fun and removes value form the fun I would expect to purchase. I’m offended they think any of this shit is good. This is what will get PC players to hate your business. If you do this crap and you can only justify it to share holders and not customers, I want you to fail.
Corporate developers make games as an investment product and not a creative product. Denuvo is in the business as a designated ball squeezer that takes the reputational heat for a greedy dev that needs 0.3% on profit chart. We are not Denuvos customers. Denuvos customers are soulless board members creating investor profit by betting their reputation is still good enough to start enshitifying without immediately getting customers to jump ship.
Having a talking head come out once a week to make an offical statement calling people literally every insult in the book for saying “Game looks like shit and this dev has a track record of being shitty, save your money” is going to start a fight.
As a PC gamer, I only pirate games I don’t know whether I’m going to like or not. And even then, most of the time I’ll probably end up buying the game later if it’s available on Steam or GoG if I actually like the game, so I can support the devs. I personally don’t have the time to buy a game on Steam, play for less than 2 hours to find out whether I like it, and get a refund if I don’t.
Source? My sample size is small, but out of my entire group(maybe 11 people) exactly one pirates PC games. I’d be shocked if 1/3 of gamers in general were pirating stuff with any kind of regularity.
If you’re including pirating console games to play via emulation that number jumps drastically, though.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/745996/gamers-pirating-video-games/
https://www.pcgamer.com/pc-piracy-survey-results-35-percent-of-pc-gamers-pirate/
I just don’t see how this type of statistic is attractive to a company who wants to sell games. Gamers may not like it but to a business executive, that’s a scary number. consoles have pretty much eliminated pirating. It’s certainly not as easy to do as it was back in the pre online days with a PS1 PS2, etc. I get downvoted but I’m trying to look at this through the eyes of capitalism and it doesn’t work. Lemmy likes to shoot the messenger. PC gamers asked why devs ignore them, here’s why.
I’m just looking at the PCGamer article- I don’t have a Statista account and I’m guessing the only source for that is the PCGamer article anyways because the numbers are the exact same.
There’s ~46,000 response that reported income there, and 22217 of them reported making less than $10,000. Another 9179 said less than $25000. I don’t think this is going to be indicative of gamers in general based off of just that.
Across the board the most common reasons were ‘demo game’, which would likely end up resulting in a sale anyways, and ‘can’t afford’ which would likely not result in a sale regardless of the ability to pirate.
But you’re right that I could absolutely see an exec reading that article, looking at a chart and losing his mind.
Isn’t collective punishment against the Geneva Convention?
We aren’t at war with the corpos. But maybe we should be…
Well, when your DRM software is utter shit that it leads gamers to pirate games you’re not going to have the best reputation.
I’m not well versed in how Denuvo works, only in how it tanks performance. Does anyone know if there is anything stopping Denuvo from checking purchase validity the first time, and on subsequent game launches it can access a secure folder with a file like an internet cookie saying “yeah, this game was bought legit at one point, let it run” and then not run alongside the game?
Well such a cookie could probably be copied by pirates as well
That would be entirely too easily bypassed. Also, afaik, it’s kinda what Denuvo does when it’s offline. You can take a file from a legitimate install- I don’t know how/which one- and put it in a pirated copy and Denuvo will work fine… for two days. Then the little certificate or w.e. expires, and you’ve gotta get another one.
Lmao it’s kinda hilarious, because all the positive PR in the world isn’t going to fix the fact that they’re a shit company with a shit product that only makes products it’s used on worse. Do as much investor spin as you want - that fact will never change, and you’ll still be hated.