Gotta love DRM that makes paid versions of games worse than pirated stuff.

  • TwilightVulpine@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    1 year ago

    COO says coming benchmarks will show anti-piracy tech has no performance impact.

    They do decryption and network calls during runtime. Computers are not magic, you cannot do additional processing, call on external resources and not have a performance impact. I will never trust when they say this, not once ever. They have a vested interest in convincing people of this even if it’s simply not possible.

    • jarfil@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well… modern computers have crypto accelerating instructions, and games rarely use all the cores to their full potential, offloading as much as they can to the GPU instead, while network traffic is relatively minimal, so it is possible to run a lot of stuff on the same computer without impacting the performance of the game itself.

      That doesn’t fix the rest of the problems, though.

      • TwilightVulpine@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sure if the person’s PC is well beyond what is required they won’t notice it, but I’ve played on old and underpowered PCs with bad internet connections enough not to assume that there will be always plentiful resources to spare.

        • jarfil@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Fair point, but does Denuvo apply to games that run on underpowered PCs? I might be mistaken, but I thought Denuvo was only meant for the “AAA” titles that require top tier hardware anyway.

    • SenorBolsa@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      on a modern PC doing that is almost entirely trivial if implemented correctly, I hate DRM but to be honest they may be right that it has no appreciable effect on the final performance of the product for the vast majority of users. Of course that’s dependent on proper implementation, what are the odds these folks at Denuvo can do that? pretty low.

      Activation limits and compatibility are the biggest issues for me.

  • jarfil@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    I would download a car and 3D print it. I would NOT download Denuvo and add an(other) backdoor to my kernel.

  • NightOwl@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s hard to see something that gets in the way of my ability to enjoy games as not evil. After all, I’m not getting paid and profiting from my inconvenience of the product I bought. Why would I care about some corporate spiel justifying why to make the product worse for me. Pay me and then I’ll nod my head. Otherwise I just want my product to work unhindered. It’s not an act of charity that I bought the game.

    Until then using handheld like the steam deck and encountering issues like license renewals getting in the way of playing offline reminds me my product is inferior to cracked versions. Or stuff like denuvo getting in the way of some people playing their games due to activation limitations.

    https://steamcommunity.com/app/678960/discussions/0/3764480479613668556/

    Whats next. Phone manufacturers actually expecting me to believe they are looking out for me by making third party replacements impossible, and have to opt for first party service that makes fixing my old phone more expensive than buying a new one?

    Go play in traffic denuvo.

  • alehel@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    I just switched to only buying games on GoG. Yeah, i dont have the same selection and miss out on a lot of games, but there are enough quality games on GoG to fill my backlog.

  • SlamDrag@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s not evil. DRM as a concept is not evil. There is actually no real philosophical justification for why it is wrong to use DRM to protect your software. Because if you made it, it is yours and you get to decide how other people use it.

    The paranoia that surrounds things like DRM show just how laughably selfish and entitled some gamers are.

    • Poke@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      1 year ago

      When a rerelease of a Gameboy advance game can’t be launched offline, that’s a problem. (MegaMan battle network collection)

      As Gabe Newell said, piracy is a service issue. Why would I buy that collection when I can emulate my old copy instead? It’s a few extra steps, so I would rather have had it just work on steam, but Denuvo kept me from doing it. This mattered recently because I went on a vacation with the steam deck and didn’t have internet at a few points.

      Sure, DRM isn’t inherently evil, but when it makes the experience worse for paying customers when compared to pirates, it really looks that way.

      Also note that in this case, emulation is not piracy, but if I wanted to play the collection edition offline then piracy would have been my only option.

      Am I selfish for paying money and wanting to use the software I bought a personal license to on my own, without internet? I think it’s selfish of the company to demand that I play their originally offline-only games online-only. Am I selfish to want to play the Spyro Reignited trilogy without aggreeing to an arbitration clause? I think companies have gotten selfish lately and paying customers have no choice but to either not play modern AAA games, pay and have a potentially worse experience when paying, or pirate and not deal with the technical and legal/privacy garbage surrounding modern AAA releases, including DRM. I didn’t even mention yet how if a game you purchased a Denuvo license to does not get an update to eventually remove the protection, it will become unplayable when they shut the activation server down.

      I remember my first awful experience with DRM with the game Spore, where I had a period of time when I moved between or upgraded my computer enough to where I ran out of activations and could not longer play my physical copy of the game despite there not being a single current activation of the game out there. There was nothing I could do about it, because there was no way to deactivate a copy even if you knew you would be changing hardware soon. I didn’t have income then, so it left a very sour taste in my mouth. We came from physical copies we could resell, to this? DRM lets companies manage game licenses on their terms, but their terms suck.

      • SlamDrag@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        As Gabe Newell said, piracy is a service issue.

        I’ve selected this text as I think it’s the heart of your post, if you disagree then let me know. I don’t agree with this statement, I think that it is a rights issue, and I think I can prove that with a thought experiment.

        Suppose for example, game companies took this idea to heart and did not do anything to stop piracy, they only focused on providing the most seamless storefront and gaming experiences possible. They create a store that works perfectly, has all the features you’d want, and has no DRM of any kind - this includes no log in needed, they go by the honor system. They expect people to only download a game that they’ve paid for. Here’s the question: will people pay for the games or not? I have a view of human nature that people generally go along the path of least resistance, and I think this is born out by evidence (but I could be wrong about this). Some people will pay for the games on moral grounds, the vast majority will not. If a developer wants to get paid, they have to make sure people pay for it. And now we have DRM. The goal of DRM is to make piracy annoying enough that the path of least resistance is to just buy the game.

        This, to me at least, proves that piracy is only a service issue in a world where DRM exists. Because DRM makes piracy annoying. If people find the DRM more annoying than piracy, it has failed to be effective DRM.

        So to get to the heart of things, I agree with you that when DRM is more annoying than piracy something has gone terribly wrong. Denuvo, in my life, for the way I play games, is not and never has even gotten close to being more annoying than piracy.

        But at the end of the day, I don’t think it is morally or ethically wrong to put DRM on a game or storefront. I just see it as something to work out on a practical level, case by case. But I made my original comment in the first place because it seems to me like a lot of people have issues with it on a moral level, which I think is silly.

        • interolivary@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          If a developer wants to get paid, they have to make sure people pay for it. And now we have DRM. The goal of DRM is to make piracy annoying enough that the path of least resistance is to just buy the game.

          You’re assuming the only options are no DRM and voluntary payment, or DRM and mandatory payment. You can still have a normal storefront and actually ask for money, and still sell games (or software in general) without DRM. GOG does this, for example, and they’re doing fine.

          • uzay@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            No, you can’t have mandatory payment for DRM-free media. That’s why all bookstores operate on an honour system and let you walk out of the store without paying for the books you take with you.

            • NightOwl@lemmy.one
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Haha yeah, never really understood people thinking DRM would cause everything to crash when Cyberpunk 2077 being such a success even with the terrible launch argues against that.

          • SlamDrag@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            From your source:

            With the exception of recently released blockbusters, there is no evidence to support the idea that online copyright infringement displaces sales

            Denuvo is used almost exclusively in exactly the scenario where the study supports the idea that piracy hurts sales. I don’t think the study helps your case.

        • NightOwl@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Here’s the question: will people pay for the games or not?

          It’s not like Witcher 3 or Cyberpunk 2077 even with all the bug issues weren’t a big financial success or anything…

          I think you are operating under the assumption that everyone would pirate or that a large portion of the public that pirates would have gone on to buy the game during the first couple of months if they couldn’t pirate it.

      • SlamDrag@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, and you have to weigh the loss of performance and/or privacy on a case by case basis. What bothers me is that people take cases where DRM strongly impacts the experience of the thing, and apply it as a general argument against DRM, when that is not an argument against DRM, but an argument against using that particular piece of software.

        I’m kind of tired of DRM headlines in my feed. Whether a game has Denuvo or not doesn’t actually matter when purchasing a game. What matters is this: is the game fun? Does the game pass the bar of acceptable performance? Discussions around DRM are mostly a distraction and a diversion from things that actually matter.

        • NightOwl@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          What matters is this: is the game fun? Does the game pass the bar of acceptable performance?

          Game working when you expect it to is pretty important. Imagine getting a car and finding out it is overly sensitive to having to have the right climate to be able to use.

          Only area where that doesn’t really apply is for rental services like streaming or game pass, which in that case does make sense why it would have DRM since it’s just part of a subscription.

    • Mummelpuffin@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You’re missing the point.

      If I strip all the DRM BS from my software (not just games, it’s a big problem with ebooks, music, etc. as well) I actually own this stuff. I can hoard it away on a hard drive, use it without anything like Steam or any online service, I don’t need to ask someone for permission to use this thing that I bought and actually physically have with me any more. Or in the case of ebooks, I can actually use this file I’ve got sitting around on whatever device I wish, because I bought the book. It’s mine. They don’t get to tell me what I can do with it.

      …And frankly, while I don’t “pirate” software because I agree that people deserve to be paid for their work, the single greatest advancement of modern technology is that things can be freely copied. We went from copying books by hand, to printing presses, to now being able to distribute them at no cost whatsoever beyond the infrastructure of the internet. If that makes a lot of typical business practices untenable, I think we should let them be untenable and figure out how to respond to that rather than nerfing the single greatest invention of the modern era just to make sure some capitalists stay happy.

    • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Malicious software that harms your computer’s performance and security, and prevents you from inspecting and modifying the application, is evil.

      I develop software myself. It does not contain anything even remotely resembling Denuvo. I don’t appreciate it when people pirate my software, and I’ve caught them doing it, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to add malicious features that effectively punish my customers for not pirating my software. That would be idiotic.


      Making non-user-hostile DRM is a hard problem, though. It has to at least make piracy inconvenient, but at the same time, it has to not stop people from reinstalling on a different computer or using the program offline.

      The best solution I can think of is for the program to check in with a server when it runs, so you can’t run it on more than one computer at a time, but allow it to be used offline for up to, say, a week after the last time it was used online, so you can’t easily defeat the DRM by blocking it at the firewall.

      Anybody got any better ideas?

      • SlamDrag@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Malicious software that harms your computer’s performance and security, and prevents you from inspecting and modifying the application, is evil.

        This is fearmongering. What is always left out of these conversations is exactly how Denuvo is a security risk, which is a tech question of this particular software and not a philosophical one. And I’ll be frank with you, I think people vastly overstate how much of a problem Denuvo is as a piece of software.

        • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I’m going to just go ahead and pretend that you politely asked me to explain the problem, instead of incorrectly insulting me.

          Denuvo is a security risk because it runs code in kernel mode. Running anything in kernel mode is a security risk, and unlike device drivers, that risk is not justified for DRM.

    • NightOwl@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why wouldn’t gamers be entitled? Do you forget that buying games is consumerism and that it’s not an act of charity? Is it not normal to feel entitled to features when you are looking to buy a good or service? What’s with this recent shift in people seeing corporations as friends.

      Imagine saying wow people who buy power tools are so entitled for not expecting them to break when they try to use it. Gamers are pretty weird group where at times the reverence they hold for what is at the end a business and requires a checks and balances of consumers and business fighting each other to keep balance instead shifts towards sympathy for companies.

    • sludge@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      “Because if you made it, it is yours and you get to decide how other people use it.” why shouldn’t people be allowed to use software how they want?

      • SlamDrag@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because you didn’t make it. I’ll grant that western ideas about intellectual property are weird and inconsistent, but I’m taking it as a given that we hold that idea in common. If a writer writes something, that sequence of words in the order they wrote is their “property” and they get to determine who gets to see it.

        I am cognizant that in this kind of space a lot of people probably won’t hold this view of intellectual property and there are good arguments as to why it shouldn’t exist at all. I suppose at this moment I’m not really in the mood to go down this rabbit hole, so forgive me if that is where you want to go.

        • tombuben@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Because you didn’t make it. I’ll grant that western ideas about intellectual property are weird and inconsistent, but I’m taking it as a given that we hold that idea in common.

          The right of the author is to be the one who decides who creates the copies, but it definitely isn’t to decide who gets to use the copies in whichever way. Traditional libraries existed for millennia and honestly wouldn’t be able to operate under this thinking.

        • sludge@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I am cognizant that in this kind of space a lot of people probably won’t hold this view of intellectual property and there are good arguments as to why it shouldn’t exist at all. I suppose at this moment I’m not really in the mood to go down this rabbit hole, so forgive me if that is where you want to go.

          fair, although i do think its a much more interesting topic :p also you are def correct about the storefront thing, ill never understand why gamers are so in love with steam -_-

    • liminis@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      wanting gamedevs to be worked to death and uninformed demands for features with zero idea of the technical requirements = ‘entitled gamers’

      not wanting malware on your computer = not being ‘entitled’

      I don’t pirate PC games for numerous reasons, but none of them are really moral. Trying to convince people that they should accept things like this on moral grounds is a poor argument anyway.

  • dan@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    we’re seen as evil because we’re helping DRM exist and we’re ensuring people make money out of games

    No, you’re seen as evil because your software is an inefficient and invasive security risk that makes games significantly worse, and compromises/punishes your paying customers in the quest for more money.

    I no longer pirate games (thanks to Steam), but I’ll never buy one with Denuvo.

    Fuck allllll the way off.