Anti-Tamper Software Maker Denuvo Files Lawsuit against DRM Hacker Voksi

[DPI]

As a consumer I have to deal with all this annoying bullshit that the pirates don't, it does jack shit positive for me, still doesn't prevent piracy, and I don't really know what other problems it could be causing due to the nature of drm *cough*securom rootkit*cough*. Your continued insistence that only pirates dislike drm is both offensive and ignorant but more importantly it clearly demonstrates your extreme bias.

I'm biased against FUD and kneejerk, mob mentalities. That's it. If denuvo legit slowed games down I'd scream about it. My argument is not "DRM good! Copy protection good!" However I make a distinction between copy protection and DRM. Denuvo is not DRM. It's an anti-tamper layer on an executable so crackers can't fuck with it to bypass the DRM.

And yes, it does work - or we wouldn't constantly be hearing about denuvo in headlines. It provides the publisher some breathing room of a few weeks to months to actually sell their work before people steal it. Anti-piracy doesn't need to be 100% to be effective.

I played Assassin's Creed with transparent copy protection that didnt impact my game, and had no sympathy for the angry, "fuck you I'll never pay for anything" entitled children on crackwatch that couldn't steal the game for 3.5 months. In fact their bitter tears are my bidet. Some of them get tired of waiting for a crack- "I caved" - those are the people that denuvo ultimately targets and why publishers implement it.

 

[Meeho]

I wasn't referring to cracked executables when I said denuvo-free executables benchmark exactly the same. I'm talking about games with denuvo that were cracked and the developer chose to re-issue a denuvo-free executable via Steam/Origin update. There's a decent list of these, they all benchmark exactly the same without denuvo, except in one case where an inexperienced developer implemented the protection improperly and admitted it.

Have they benchmarked load times?

 

[nimer]

Your understanding has some gaps here. The "example" you're referring to was someone that made a deceptive video trying to show the non-denuvo (demo) executable performed better. The deception was in running the denuvo (full version) executable first, which cached game asset files in windows. The guy then immediately ran the demo (non denuvo) executable without bothering to reboot first so that each test was done from the same baseline. The comparison was a joke from the get-go because the game asset loading that the video was trying to claim denuvo slows down would have nothing to do with how denuvo even works.




I wasn't referring to cracked executables when I said denuvo-free executables benchmark exactly the same. I'm talking about games with denuvo that were cracked and the developer chose to re-issue a denuvo-free executable via Steam/Origin update. There's a decent list of these, they all benchmark exactly the same without denuvo, except in one case where an inexperienced developer implemented the protection improperly and admitted it.

Very interesting, thank you for expanding. i am actually here to learn rather then argue

and yes i had a brain fart, in forgetting the numerous examples of a non drm version being issued after the fact.

My memory is hazy but havnt there been a handful of comments from development teams discussing the additional resource strain that denuvo incurs?