Denuvo Blames Gamer Toxicity for DRM Protection Hate

erek

erek

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 19, 2005
Messages
12,389
"Addressing a question about "toxicity" and oft-genuine concerns from gamers over the use of Denuvo anti-tamper and anti-cheat software, Ullmann seemingly implied that gamers are just upset because the software works, robbing gamers of the ability to simply play a game for free instead of paying full retail price. When asked directly about why Denuvo doesn't address the claims of performance hits to games that implement it, Ullmann placed the onus on game developers to perform those comparative tests, again calling the gaming and piracy community toxic in the response. He dismissed the idea of Denuvo or a third party performing comparative analysis of the impact of anti-tamper and anti-cheat software, citing intellectual property concerns and community mistrust for a lack of first-party testing. At the same time, Ullmann admits that Denuvo has had performance impacts on games in the past but remarks that it's "interesting" that there aren't more incidents of reduced gaming performance. These comments were also made in spite of Denuvo's own marketing materials claiming that the software has "No impact on in-game performance.""

1729719674333.png


Source: https://www.techpowerup.com/328030/...rotection-hate-dismisses-performance-concerns
 
Denuvo can’t claim no impact, they shouldn’t be allowed to.

You can not measure something without impacting it, you can not monitor something without impacting the outcome.

That’s one of those fundamental truths, they should at best be allowed to say they have found that under ideal circumstances the performance impact is negligible.

But I think we all know that in development there is rarely such a thing as ideal circumstances.
 
Calling customers toxic probably isn't the best way to market your software, but he's right as to the main reason people hate it: it stops them from freeloading.
 
uOpt said:
The pirates never suffer from their software since they get copies without it.
Click to expand...
Yeah. It's pretty stupid. Sometimes I've purchased a game to support the developer and then end up playing the pirated game because it doesn't have a performance hit. It's this kind of nonsense over the years that is pushing me to console gaming more and more.
 
GoldenTiger said:
Calling customers toxic probably isn't the best way to market your software, but he's right as to the main reason people hate it: it stops them from freeloading.
Click to expand...
Which for the most part isn't the main reason they hate it. If people are pirating the game, it's so they can play it without the overheads and resulting performance issues - The solution to piracy is creating a situation where it's actually beneficial to pirate the software in question as to avoid the overheads and resulting performance issues.
 
Gamers are filthy thieves. Own up to it. If it weren't for anti piracy software, there would be no gaming industry.
 
Shoganai said:
These folks really need to stop calling their customer base toxic.
Click to expand...
People who play games aren't their customers, hell developers aren't even their customers. Clueless executives at publishing companies are their customers which is why they're slinging this crap.
 
Comparative test are irrelevant by now.

I am quite done justifying my personal preference for games not containing drm in general, and denuvo in particular. Publishers of games that contain denuvo can go pound sand, and even those who have include a light one like the steam-client dependency get moved to the bottom of the pile.

If that is "toxic", so be it. Denuvo can go cry right next to ubisoft, then.
 
Last edited:
Ebernanut said:
People who play games aren't their customers, hell developers aren't even their customers. Clueless executives at publishing companies are their customers which is why they're slinging this crap.
Click to expand...
I think you understood the point of my comment. "These folks really need to stop calling gamers toxic." Does that offend your semantical sensibilities less?
 
I don't even care if they want try to have anti-cheat or piracy checks.. AS LONG AS THEY FUCKING DO IT SERVER SIDE.... Client side DRM and anti-cheat is bullshit... and the fact M$ gives these pricks kernel level access makes me very angry.
 
pendragon1 said:
NOT tech news.
Click to expand...

DRM in games is definitely tech news. PC games run on ... PC's? We even have a dedicated subforum for it. It's tech news.

GoldenTiger said:
Calling customers toxic probably isn't the best way to market your software, but he's right as to the main reason people hate it: it stops them from freeloading.
Click to expand...

Not really. As they mention - "Has no impact on in-game performance". And that has been determined to be a lie. Denuvo has had plenty of mishaps in the past with legitimate paying customers. There's a lot of examples of Denuvo having large impacts on in-game performance, including having the cracked version of games running MUCH better with no stuttering, lower load times, etc. than the non-cracked version. Yes, there are plenty of people that hate it due to the more difficult time of pirating the game. But, that's always going to happen. Take that part of of it. There's a large amount of legitimate paying customers that have issues with the DRM of Denuvo and they have for a long time. It's been a bad word for a long time for the people that bought and paid for the games. Sure, it's a bad word for pirates, too, but at least when it's cracked they get a superior version of the game itself.

Plus - calling the paying and complaining customers toxic while saying it has no negative impact on performance is a real bad move. They're trying to clean up their PR image with a Discord (failed) and things like this (failing), and it's making them look even worse. Own up to your shit. Yes, it works excellent to slow down piracy, but saying it doesn't have a negative effect for paying customers is complete BS. Calling the paying customers that complain about those negative effects toxic is BS.

Look at the Hogwarts game. It's cracked. You can get better performance with the cracked version vs. the Denuvo version. Even if you do buy it, you can still find the cracked version and have a better version. At some point, someone is going to be like "Hmmm... Why not just skip that middle man and go direct to the pirates?". That's how it worked with No-CD cracks. It just became the better option and more convenient and better performance. They're pushing the end user away. But, the execs that want the DRM in the product are sold by those numbers. Denuvo isn't selling or marketing to the end user, they're going to the executive accountants that see the sales numbers vs. actual usability. Which is a problem well beyond just DRM in the gaming industry. It's another corporate suit decision, the same ones that killed Atari, took EA and Activision from being great to being .... whatever they are now.
 
Shoganai said:
These folks really need to stop calling their customer base toxic.
Click to expand...

GoldenTiger said:
Calling customers toxic probably isn't the best way to market your software, but he's right as to the main reason people hate it: it stops them from freeloading.
Click to expand...

Ur_Mom said:
Not really. As they mention - "Has no impact on in-game performance". And that has been determined to be a lie. Denuvo has had plenty of mishaps in the past with legitimate paying customers. There's a lot of examples of Denuvo having large impacts on in-game performance, including having the cracked version of games running MUCH better with no stuttering, lower load times, etc. than the non-cracked version. Yes, there are plenty of people that hate it due to the more difficult time of pirating the game. But, that's always going to happen. Take that part of of it. There's a large amount of legitimate paying customers that have issues with the DRM of Denuvo and they have for a long time. It's been a bad word for a long time for the people that bought and paid for the games. Sure, it's a bad word for pirates, too, but at least when it's cracked they get a superior version of the game itself.

Plus - calling the paying and complaining customers toxic while saying it has no negative impact on performance is a real bad move. They're trying to clean up their PR image with a Discord (failed) and things like this (failing), and it's making them look even worse. Own up to your shit. Yes, it works excellent to slow down piracy, but saying it doesn't have a negative effect for paying customers is complete BS. Calling the paying customers that complain about those negative effects toxic is BS.

Look at the Hogwarts game. It's cracked. You can get better performance with the cracked version vs. the Denuvo version. Even if you do buy it, you can still find the cracked version and have a better version. At some point, someone is going to be like "Hmmm... Why not just skip that middle man and go direct to the pirates?". That's how it worked with No-CD cracks. It just became the better option and more convenient and better performance. They're pushing the end user away. But, the execs that want the DRM in the product are sold by those numbers. Denuvo isn't selling or marketing to the end user, they're going to the executive accountants that see the sales numbers vs. actual usability. Which is a problem well beyond just DRM in the gaming industry. It's another corporate suit decision, the same ones that killed Atari, took EA and Activision from being great to being .... whatever they are now.
Click to expand...
Gamers are not Denuvo customers. Publishers and developers are. That is why they explicitly calls out gamers, not customers.
 
They have a point though.
You shouldn't be mad at Denuvo itself, you should be mad at the developers using Denuvo in their game and their implemenation of it.
Denuvo isn't the only DRM solution. There are plenty of other DRM solutions they can use that can mess up performance or not, and they can also just not use one at all.

It's like getting mad at the asphalt mine because the road has potholes.
 
sharknice said:
They have a point though.
You shouldn't be mad at Denuvo itself, you should be mad at the developers using Denuvo in their game and their implemenation of it.
Denuvo isn't the only DRM solution. There are plenty of other DRM solutions they can use that can mess up performance or not, and they can also just not use one at all.

It's like getting mad at the asphalt mine because the road has potholes.
Click to expand...
Denuvo is the only solution that doesn't get cracked within minutes of a game being released. It nor.ally taking months and there are still games that haven't been cracked.
 
Those sound like DEI words, and as we know that's not something people like today. This complaint means that companies are less likely to want to pay for Denuvo due to how ineffective it is and how it just enrages their costumers. The performance impact is very real and was a very big problem for Resident Evil Village on PC. It's gotten to the point that if you want the fastest version of a game, then you need to pirate it. Denuvo is so ineffective against piracy that games with Denuvo will now limit how many PCs you can install the game onto. It's usually five, but if you're a Linux user and switch between different versions of Proton and use a VM, this will consume those five. When you reach past that threshold, the game will lock you out for 24 hours. I can see companies receiving phone calls for their tech support over such an issue.


View: https://youtu.be/-ig4dqozB1I?si=wL5N9bvIlezLN1Ve
 
Last edited:
DukenukemX said:
Those sound like DEI words, and as we know that's not something people like today. This complaint means that companies are less likely to want to pay for Denuvo due to how ineffective it is and how it just enrages their consumers. The performance impact is very real and was a very big problem for Resident Evil Village on PC. It's gotten to the point that if you want the fastest version of a game, then you need to pirate it. Denuvo is so ineffective against piracy that games with Denuvo will now limit how many PCs you can install the game onto. It's usually five, but if you're a Linux user and switch between different versions of Proton and use a VM, this will consume those five. When you reach past that threshold, the game will lock you out for 24 hours. I can see companies receiving phone calls for their tech support over such an issue.


View: https://youtu.be/-ig4dqozB1I?si=wL5N9bvIlezLN1Ve
Click to expand...

But it is effective. Like i said it takes months to crack it if they even manage.
 
Armenius said:
Gamers are not Denuvo customers. Publishers and developers are. That is why they explicitly calls out gamers, not customers.
Click to expand...

That's why I added towards the end that it's the suits and execs that make the decision. Instead of customers, I should have used "end users". We are the customers of the end product, not of Denuvo itself (no one I know would willingly buy DRM). But, yea, I definitely get what you're saying and fully agree. Just misuse of terms on my part.
 
Shoganai said:
These folks really need to stop calling their customer base toxic.
Click to expand...
Their customer base isn't even gamers, it's publishers. They are the one buying and using the product, we are just the unfortunate victims of that transaction.
 
wareyore said:
Gamers are filthy thieves. Own up to it. If it weren't for anti piracy software, there would be no gaming industry.
Click to expand...
Certainly not solely for $70+ AAA games, no. Indie games would probably still be doing alright. And there are plenty of AAA and otherwise games that do not have DRM that have sold just fine.
 
End of the day DRM doesn't add benefit to gamers. It only has downsides. Whether publishers/developers see benefit is up to them to decide. But for the game buyer it has downsides, and that does include load time increases and possibly some performance loss for those on lower end set ups.
 
I haven't bought a $60+ game in ages, last $40 game I bought was a physical copy of a console game, so denuvo is the least of my concerns. That said, they can go pound sand. At the end of the day, pirates gonna pirate whether denuvo is there or not (it'll just be longer before they do), you aren't gonna force them to do anything with their money, except maybe pay somebody to break the protection faster.
 
Nobu said:
I haven't bought a $60+ game in ages, last $40 game I bought was a physical copy of a console game, so denuvo is the least of my concerns. That said, they can go pound sand. At the end of the day, pirates gonna pirate whether denuvo is there or not (it'll just be longer before they do), you aren't gonna force them to do anything with their money, except maybe pay somebody to break the protection faster.
Click to expand...
I always pay full retail price for certain things like GOW. For everything else there is a steam sale just around the corner....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top