Denuvo Says Doom Dropped Their Anti-Piracy Tech Because It Got The Job Done

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Evidently, Denuvo is only relevant during the initial release window. The company insists that the anti-piracy tech was never positioned as uncrackable and that the goal was to always minimize piracy around launch.

“The simple reason why Denuvo Anti Tamper was removed from Doom was because it had accomplished its purpose by keeping the game safe from piracy during the initial sales window,” Denuvo’s Robert Hernandez said to me in an email. “The protection on Doom held up for nearly four months, which is an impressive accomplishment for such a high-profile game.”
 
Does this imply that its like an ongoing expense or something? Why would take the time to remove something from a program if it will continue to offer protection? So it seems there is a crossover point where it's not worth keeping it anymore for some reason, versus the income you are protecting because you do have it.

I don't know much about this protection system other then it's an "always connected" type thing. So makes me wonder if the software company has to pay a continuing fee to use it.
 
westrock2000 said:
Does this imply that its like an ongoing expense or something? Why would take the time to remove something from a program if it will continue to offer protection? So it seems there is a crossover point where it's not worth keeping it anymore for some reason, versus the income you are protecting because you do have it.

I don't know much about this protection system other then it's an "always connected" type thing. So makes me wonder if the software company has to pay a continuing fee to use it.
Click to expand...

From a business perspective it makes sense for the game company to make it subscription based, because Denuvo is correct in that eventually the DRM will get broken and it's a waste to pay for something that's useless and even a maintenance hindrance in a few months. My question is how much did licensing the tech cost, and did it really have an effect on boosting sales.
 
Last edited:
Either way it's still good news to my ears. There are so many older games that keep the crap DRM on there forever like herpes. I have more than a few games that no longer can be played because either the activated game is still installed but the computer has been upgraded enough to require reactivation but the servers are gone, or I can't uninstall properly because activation servers are gone so I lose an activation or whatever nonsense it has.
 
Probleminfected said:
So I'll just wait 4 months or so and then pirate it???
Click to expand...

The idea behind it is that the longer the window, the more people will opt to buy it. When games where being cracked within a week or two, I'd imagine a ton of people just opted to pirate it (if singleplayer). The longer that pirate ship takes to get to port, the more likely people will give in.
 
Tweak42 said:
From a business perspective it makes sense for the game company to make it subscription based, because Denuvo is correct in that eventually the DRM will get broken and it's a waste to pay for something that's useless and even a maintenance hindrance in a few months. My question is how much did licensing the tech cost, and did it really have an effect on boosting sales.
Click to expand...


But it's still going to offer considerable protection. Despite the rumors, most people don't pirate software. It's like the sensors at the exit of a store. Just having it their prevents a lot of theft, even if they don't actually function all that well.
 
Spidey329 said:
The idea behind it is that the longer the window, the more people will opt to buy it. When games where being cracked within a week or two, I'd imagine a ton of people just opted to pirate it (if singleplayer). The longer that pirate ship takes to get to port, the more likely people will give in.
Click to expand...


Oh I get it, but... I find waiting 4 months or so for patches and possible discounts is always the best way to go anyway.
 
Probleminfected said:
Oh I get it, but... I find waiting 4 months or so for patches and possible discounts is always the best way to go anyway.
Click to expand...

Yes, buying a game on the first day to become the best bug tester is silly. I'm clamoring for Civilization VI, but I already know that I'm not going to truly enjoy it until all the expansion packs are out for it. So why buy it for full price and let it languish in my library until the GOTY edition is released?

I think the Steam Wish List is the greatest thing that was ever added to Steam. I use it to track games that might suit my fancy, but haven't been patched yet. Most of the time the front page of the Steam Store will tell me that a game on my Wish List has been updated with a new patch. Even better is that Steam will email you when a game on the list goes on sale! So not only can you track the patching progress of games on it via the front page of the Steam Store, they tell you when it is cheap!
 
I'd be curious to know if there is a point after release where piracy becomes preferable to stagnation and obscurity.
 
Are these guys on drugs? Doom was being played from torrents from a day after release date...
 
Funny, I'm more inclined to buy games that do NOT have any kind of DRM. CDPR and Flying Wild Hog are companies that get my cash. I don't like UWP in Gears 4, but XPA cross-buy helped sweeten the deal (plus The Coalition made a very enjoyable game with great PC performance, LAN/offline support, split-screen on PC, and even cross-system co-op). I did pay for Doom 4 even though I hate giving money to Bethesda, but id Software very clearly deserved the money for that ridiculously awesome game they made (along with making a true proper PC version instead of a lame console port, and gawd damn I love dat Vulkan support). I really don't like supporting any game that uses Denuvo, but they got me with Doom. I'm glad Denuvo was eventually removed from the game. I just wish every game would come out on GOG. I saw that Crysis 1 and Crysis Warhead finally ditched SecuROM and were re-released on GOG. I highly doubt Bethesda will allow Doom 4 on Linux, but gawd I hope it happens.

I've heard over the years that those first few months after launch are the most crucial for a game's sales, but I'm still dumbfounded that most people don't do like many of us old-time gamers and just wait a few fucking months. By then, there are patches and fixes and sale prices (I paid 30 bucks for Doom 4 like a month after release), as some of you mentioned already, and it gives you time to figure out if the game is worth a purchase. I had to spend time with Doom 4 and Gears 4 first before I knew they were worth the money. Then again, I wouldn't have been able to play those games if my friends hadn't bought them fairly soon after launch, so I guess there are always two sides to the coin.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dgz
like this
Megalith said:
Evidently, Denuvo is only relevant during the initial release window. The company insists that the anti-piracy tech was never positioned as uncrackable and that the goal was to always minimize piracy around launch.
Click to expand...
That's generally the excuse publishers given for horrible DRM, that it stops piracy for several weeks, when most copies of a title are sold at full price. I think it's more of an online brake at this point because single player DRM is a lost cause.
 
xq78z.gif
 
This is what game copy protection is meant to do, protect it for a period after release to promote high sales.
They know it will get cracked eventually.
 
Sure Denuvo, whatever you say. That's a nice copy protection system you have their. Would be a shame if someone were to accept your challenge.
 
vegeta535 said:
No it wasn't. It was cracked around the end of August.
Click to expand...

^^

IIRC there was a glitch for a while that allowed you to move files over from the demo that allowed you to play the whole game but it was quickly patched. The game is worth the $20 I spent on it.
 
DukenukemX said:
Sure Denuvo, whatever you say. That's a nice copy protection system you have their. Would be a shame if someone were to accept your challenge.
Click to expand...

You mean the challenge they've been fairly successful at so far despite multiple groups trying to break games on release and some groups claiming to have cracked it completely but conveniently not providing proof? Let's not pretend they're saying it's uncrackable, but it takes long enough that it does what they promise.
 
BloodyIron said:
Does anyone apart from stock holders care?
Click to expand...
I'm not entirely sure on what comment your question was directed, but as far as people caring about Denuvo removal, Linux players care a lot. The Alpha worked great through Wine, but Denuvo squashed that at release. Now that it's been lifted there are already working patches to get the release version running again.
 
Derangel said:
You mean the challenge they've been fairly successful at so far despite multiple groups trying to break games on release and some groups claiming to have cracked it completely but conveniently not providing proof? Let's not pretend they're saying it's uncrackable, but it takes long enough that it does what they promise.
Click to expand...
Up to this point, the groups that crack games weren't prepared for this. If you paid attention to reddit discussions about Denuvo, it attracted people that normally weren't involved due to the challenge. It'll get to the point where people will crack it in minutes.
 
DukenukemX said:
Up to this point, the groups that crack games weren't prepared for this. If you paid attention to reddit discussions about Denuvo, it attracted people that normally weren't involved due to the challenge. It'll get to the point where people will crack it in minutes.
Click to expand...
We'll see. Denuvo seems unique when it comes to DRM as it seems to require every game to be cracked independently. It doesn't seem as simple as old methods have been. It helps that Denuvo hires DRM crackers to work on improving it.
 
Probleminfected said:
Oh I get it, but... I find waiting 4 months or so for patches and possible discounts is always the best way to go anyway.
Click to expand...
My typical strategy is to wait about 2-3 years. By then, all DLC's (if any) are available, patches are complete, and you can get it from a Steam sale for under $10. I'm an adult, have limited time, and own over 800 games I have never even played yet.
I actually bought Doom within the first month. I loved the old games. This version is fun, but I haven't spent more than a few hours with it. I should have stuck to my plan.
 
DarkStar02 said:
^^

IIRC there was a glitch for a while that allowed you to move files over from the demo that allowed you to play the whole game but it was quickly patched. The game is worth the $20 I spent on it.
Click to expand...
Where did you find it for $20 I want it!
 
steakman1971 said:
My typical strategy is to wait about 2-3 years. By then, all DLC's (if any) are available, patches are complete, and you can get it from a Steam sale for under $10. I'm an adult, have limited time, and own over 800 games I have never even played yet.
I actually bought Doom within the first month. I loved the old games. This version is fun, but I haven't spent more than a few hours with it. I should have stuck to my plan.
Click to expand...

Yeah I wait a year or two. Nice to play games when you have all the DLC and patches in one go for a quarter of the original price.

It's like finding a great classic rock band and they have 15 albums in their catalogue already.
 
I think it's a good strategy. Why bother attempting the difficult crack if it's just going to be gone in 6 months anyway. That way there is less people trying to break it, now the product looks stronger.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top