Assassin’s Creed: Origins DRM Hammers Gamers’ CPUs

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Could desperate anti-piracy measures be the cause for Assassin’s Creed: Origin’s massive CPU utilization? Maybe – but even if this turns out to be fake news, it’s worth reporting that Ubisoft did in fact double down on DRM, integrating both Denuvo and VMProtect into a single title.

Assassin's Creed: Origins gamers are reporting massive CPU utilization. While the game is said to be quite resource-hungry already, game cracker Voksi informs TorrentFreak that anti-piracy efforts are to blame. With Denuvo in trouble, Ubisoft has called in reinforcements which are reportedly dragging down all but the most powerful machines. "It's anti-consumer and a disgusting move," he says.
 
Master_shake_ said:
8 threads because 7 of them are making sure your copy is legit.

ubisoft: fuck your shit.

at least the DRM servers are working.
Click to expand...

It's not that bad. It's only one core. Unfortunately, this happens to be the main one the game uses.

zQyQ8WH.jpg
 
I don't really know why people still worry about the likes of Denuvo. I mean that shit gets cracked within hours or even before the game comes out. Why do publishers keep doing this? Do they have a contract with them that states they have to use their DRM service despite not working and just adding bloat?

I'd rather let the pirates pirate. But make sure they the pirates get a special secret. Just for them.

 
mt2e said:
Dudes get a hard on just to crack this.
Click to expand...

Exactly. All the pirate folks are gonna say is "Hey heard your computer is working overtime, install this and your game will be buttery smooth" then the PC players flock to pirate to get the crack and OH LOOKIE! There's more games out there that are cracked and down the rabbit hole they go...
 
Great now we need "drm cores" on our cpu's to offset this shit, thanks ubisoft.
 
why isn't denuvo bankrupt by now? All their shit gets cracked so fast, and their policy is to refund the cost to the publisher if it gets cracked.

I have never heard of vmprotect, but Google shows that its name is associated with cryptomining.

So it would be laughable if Ubi inadvertently added a cryptominer to this buggy shit.
 
Kdawg said:
why isn't denuvo bankrupt by now? All their shit gets cracked so fast, and their policy is to refund the cost to the publisher if it gets cracked.

I have never heard of vmprotect, but Google shows that its name is associated with cryptomining.

So it would be laughable if Ubi inadvertently added a cryptominer to this buggy shit.
Click to expand...

They will only refund if the publisher asks for it and agrees to remove the DRM.

VMProtect is anti-tamper software. VMP is the software Denuvo was accused of using illegally.
 
This is the same kicking and screaming loop that happens whenever a new title comes out that gives pirates headaches -- "performance is way worse with Denuvo! We have no proof but just help spread the word."

Fact is the game is CPU intensive (god forbid, a new game in 2017), and employs a combination of Denuvo and VMP to prevent piracy. But there is zero proof quantifying Denuvo/VMP creating any performance overhead by partially containerizing the game's EXE. All we have is the screenshot of a wannabe cracker's breakpoint debugger showing that calls to VMP are happening during gameplay (no shit - working as intended). Only the developer actually knows if there's any performance overhead in the anti-piracy tech.

FWIW, the last few Ubi games have all been pretty CPU intensive. The VMP layer in this game also has nothing to do with any action Denuvo the company took. It's Ubisoft's VMP license, and was their action to protect the Denuvo layer with it.

And it seems to be working as intended since the game plays great while giving pirates fits. Win-win.
 
Last edited:
Leave it to Ubi to create the dumbest DRM ever.

Anyone remember the "always connected" DRM they had in the past? It had almost zero room for error and you couldn't play offline at all. You so much as start dropping packets, you lost connection, or if their servers were acting up, your single player game would pause. It received so much backlash that they were forced to remove it.



 
Simmonz said:
Put a DRM free version on GOG, Humble or Itch.io and i'd pay full price but I won't touch this bullshit even for $5.
Click to expand...

Got it for free with my ASUS Ryzen board...guess they might as well pack a game that needs at least 8-Threads with Ryzen hardware.
 
Yeah, Denuvo doesn't slow down your games.

It DOES triple load times.

I noticed this when they removed it from Doom. No performance improvement in-game, but load times went from over a minute down to tens of seconds.

Cause you know, game companies like to make your brand new SSD feel like a 30-year-old drive :D

I can't comment on VMP though.
 
defaultluser said:
Yeah, Denuvo doesn't slow down your games.

It DOES triple load times.

I noticed this when they removed it from Doom. No performance improvement in-game, but load times went from over a minute down to tens of seconds.

Cause you know, game companies like to make your brand new SSD feel like a 30-year-old drive :D

I can't comment on VMP though.
Click to expand...
Well as Derangel mentioned Denuvo used to have a copy of VMP with it (pretty sure it was the version used with Doom).
An anti-copyright infringement software company infringing on software (how about that)...

My thoughts are more along the lines of: Did they have the same guys doing bugfixes/optimization on Unity release also implement this custom version of Denuvo+VMP ;)
 
Ummm.. Yeah. PASS due to the P.O.S. DRM. I'd actually been thinking about getting this one until I heard Denuvo mentioned. If/when UBI separates this waste from their product I'll entertain purchasing it.
 
DPI said:
This is the same kicking and screaming loop that happens whenever a new title comes out that gives pirates headaches -- "performance is way worse with Denuvo! We have no proof but just help spread the word."

Fact is the game is CPU intensive (god forbid, a new game in 2017), and employs a combination of Denuvo and VMP to prevent piracy. But there is zero proof quantifying Denuvo/VMP creating any performance overhead by partially containerizing the game's EXE. All we have is the screenshot of a wannabe cracker's breakpoint debugger showing that calls to VMP are happening during gameplay (no shit - working as intended). Only the developer actually knows if there's any performance overhead in the anti-piracy tech.

FWIW, the last few Ubi games have all been pretty CPU intensive. The VMP layer in this game also has nothing to do with any action Denuvo the company took. It's Ubisoft's VMP license, and was their action to protect the Denuvo layer with it.

And it seems to be working as intended since the game plays great while giving pirates fits. Win-win.
Click to expand...

This is the same kicking and screaming loop that happens whenever a new title comes out from publishers that gives pirates a few hours to days to crack. Sure, fully expect we can get a game with a CPU load in 2017, but there's nothing saying their DRM doesn't contribute to a lesser experience for a paid customer either. It'll give pirates fits for a while, but DRM is loose-loose.
 
Shotglass01 said:
This is the same kicking and screaming loop that happens whenever a new title comes out from publishers that gives pirates a few hours to days to crack. Sure, fully expect we can get a game with a CPU load in 2017, but there's nothing saying their DRM doesn't contribute to a lesser experience for a paid customer either. It'll give pirates fits for a while, but DRM is loose-loose.
Click to expand...

Disappointingly derivative, but I think the burden of proving the anti-piracy tech does contribute to any kind of "lesser experience" rests with the accuser. Meanwhile, paying customers are playing the game without a care because the tech is transparent. And people with subpar hardware are blaming the DRM because it's easier than blaming their hardware.

Consider this: if there was any performance difference in the dozen+ denuvo titles released over the past 6 months that later had denuvo removed by the developer, don't you think pirates and pro-piracy blogs would be shouting it from the rooftops, after re-benchmarking the denuvo-free version?

But we never hear a peep after a game is re-released without denuvo and re-benchmarked Guess why.
 
Last edited:
DPI said:
Putting aside the derivative blather for a moment, the burden of proving this particular DRM does contribute to a "lesser experience" for a paid customer rests on the person(s) making the claim. Paying customers are playing the title without a care because the DRM is transparent.

That said, it would be absurdly easy to prove the claim that "Denuvo kills performance":

Step 1: Benchmark any new titles that come out with Denuvo protection.
Step 2: Re-benchmark any titles that have Denuvo later removed by developer (there have been at least 12 this year)
Step 3: Compile results and broadcast the embarrassing performance delta for the world to see

But do you know why we never hear a peep from the piracy crowd about performance differences after denuvo is removed from a title? BECAUSE THERE IS NONE, and calling attention to the fact would undermine the whole FUD narrative.
Click to expand...

Hey, buy what you want. I'm absolutely not on board with the idea that DRM always works perfectly all of the time in all of the configurations with all of the Windows changes and making allowances for forced updates from 10. So blathering as it may be to you, I see a lot of possibility for issues to happen. It sure as hell isn't as transparent as you may make it out to be and it still punishes paying consumers just by being in existence.
 
I've been playing as a smooth experience, but then again I'm on a 5960X @ 4.5ghz - if that's what is keeping me from a stutter-fest (though I admit I've had more crashes with Origins than any other title recently. Not sure if related...) because of DRM... ghastly! I honestly thought that Ubi was going to give up Denuvo - which is thankfully cracked quickly now...but they also added another DRM subsystem? No matter what this is too much for a tittle that should play well on much lower level CPU's than mine. Its also worth considering exactly how well they've conditioned the game (DRM and otherwise) to run multithreaded. Especially if they depend on this nonsense, they ought to at very least be sure to properly multithread the whole thing. In any event, disappointing.
 
thanks pirates. If you cheapskate bottom feeding leeches wouldn't pirate we wouldn't have DRM.
 
opfreak said:
thanks pirates. If you cheapskate bottom feeding leeches wouldn't pirate we wouldn't have DRM.
Click to expand...
Fucking with those who did buy it won't change the mind of those who didn't buy it.There were numerous times when I HAD to pirate games to be able to play them. Games I already owned. How does that help to get people to buy games?

And everything comes back to education education education. If the fucker would realize that not buying the game even though he could afford it, means there might not be any more games, he would buy it.

I'd rather devs pleed and apply to reason, and those who can't be persuaded by reason are useless humans anyway and nothing will change their minds.
 
M76 said:
Fucking with those who did buy it won't change the mind of those who didn't buy it.There were numerous times when I HAD to pirate games to be able to play them. Games I already owned. How does that help to get people to buy games?

And everything comes back to education education education. If the fucker would realize that not buying the game even though he could afford it, means there might not be any more games, he would buy it.

I'd rather devs pleed and apply to reason, and those who can't be persuaded by reason are useless humans anyway and nothing will change their minds.
Click to expand...

I agree that devs f-up. But I wont give pirates a pass. they are only able to get any gaming enjoyment because others pay for games. Pirates are worse then welfare queens. They actually think they are doing something good, and righteous.
 
DPI said:
This is the same kicking and screaming loop that happens whenever a new title comes out that gives pirates headaches -- "performance is way worse with Denuvo! We have no proof but just help spread the word."

Fact is the game is CPU intensive (god forbid, a new game in 2017), and employs a combination of Denuvo and VMP to prevent piracy. But there is zero proof quantifying Denuvo/VMP creating any performance overhead by partially containerizing the game's EXE. All we have is the screenshot of a wannabe cracker's breakpoint debugger showing that calls to VMP are happening during gameplay (no shit - working as intended). Only the developer actually knows if there's any performance overhead in the anti-piracy tech.

FWIW, the last few Ubi games have all been pretty CPU intensive. The VMP layer in this game also has nothing to do with any action Denuvo the company took. It's Ubisoft's VMP license, and was their action to protect the Denuvo layer with it.

And it seems to be working as intended since the game plays great while giving pirates fits. Win-win.
Click to expand...

Dude.. no.

First, this game is the third on this engine. One of which is a sprawling open world title, and that game has about half the CPU utilization.

Second, this game actually works on consoles which are bringing a lot less CPU to the table.

Third, people are reporting this insane level of CPU utilization regardless of visual settings, which means that turning down the pretty and resolution is not the reason consoles aren't having problems.

Fourth, this is from ubisoft and is an assassin's creed title. A franchise which famously entered the world with DRM where you had to literally yank out your network cable at the right time to avoid having the DRM cripple gameplay.

Ubisoft has done this bullshit repeatedly and gets not slack. The answer for ubisoft has almost NEVER beeen that the game pushes hardware to the limit. It has almost always been that ubisoft has nothing but contempt for those who legally purchase the game on pc and would like you to go fuck yourself.
 
Mohonri said:
My understanding is that it's the publishers, not the devs, that insist on DRM.
Click to expand...

God forbid the publishers want to make money. The devs get a check either way.

This assumes their conclusion that pirates cost them money which is debateable.
 
Wait, Ubisoft makes games? I thought they just made cash cows and ignored the public.
 
raz-0 said:
Dude.. no.

First, this game is the third on this engine. One of which is a sprawling open world title, and that game has about half the CPU utilization.

Second, this game actually works on consoles which are bringing a lot less CPU to the table.

Third, people are reporting this insane level of CPU utilization regardless of visual settings, which means that turning down the pretty and resolution is not the reason consoles aren't having problems.

Fourth, this is from ubisoft and is an assassin's creed title. A franchise which famously entered the world with DRM where you had to literally yank out your network cable at the right time to avoid having the DRM cripple gameplay.

Ubisoft has done this bullshit repeatedly and gets not slack. The answer for ubisoft has almost NEVER beeen that the game pushes hardware to the limit. It has almost always been that ubisoft has nothing but contempt for those who legally purchase the game on pc and would like you to go fuck yourself.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately none of that provides any evidence that Denuvo and/or VMP is responsible for the "high CPU utilization" in this game. Some pirate taking a screenshot of his breakpoint debugger and making the statement "see, VMP gets called during gameplay!" also does nothing more than confirm VMP is working.

As for Ubisoft "almost never pushing hardware limits", interestingly AC Unity, which didn't feature VMP anti-piracy tech, utilizes all Cores and Threads of a Threadripper CPU, and scales extremely well on it. Watch Dogs 2 and GR:Wildlands are also pretty CPU intensive.
 
Last edited:
BloodyIron said:
Wait, Ubisoft makes games? I thought they just made cash cows and ignored the public.
Click to expand...
They also state recommended spec is 3770K, in the fine print means 30 fps is sustainable. Most people would want 60 at least. Also, checkout this video for Rime, clearly some games do suffer from DRM, so it will be interesting to see what a patched AC:O can do without it, ubisoft has said it only used about 1% of CPU, except they don't say 1% on what, so I guess 8700K or something most people don't have.

 
triwolf said:
They also state recommended spec is 3770K, in the fine print means 30 fps is sustainable. Most people would want 60 at least. Also, checkout this video for Rime, clearly some games do suffer from DRM, so it will be interesting to see what a patched AC:O can do without it, ubisoft has said it only used about 1% of CPU, except they don't say 1% on what, so I guess 8700K or something most people don't have.

Click to expand...


Never heard or remember of Ubisoft ever removing DRM after being cracked, doubt it will happen here. If anything, even if it hurt performance hard, I doubt Ubisoft will want to admit being at fault.
 
SighTurtle said:
Never heard or remember of Ubisoft ever removing DRM after being cracked, doubt it will happen here. If anything, even if it hurt performance hard, I doubt Ubisoft will want to admit being at fault.
Click to expand...
You are probably right, and they probably have some intel stock that will see a rise from the big money gamers that have no problems paying twenty thou for a new system. If the DRM gets removed in a less legal way, and it still performs slowly, they can say "told you so" and still get some sweet intel stock cash. Pure conjecture, but you never know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top