31–40 of 80 posts
"Ubisoft has also implemented VMProtect, a piece of software that protects code by executing it on a virtual machine with non-standard architecture [...] tanking the game's performance by 30-40 per cent" This feels so extreme.
https://image.prntscr.com/image/_6qmeqq0RBCMIAtGK8VnRw.png
https://np.reddit.com/r/CrackWatch/comments/79pd62/update_on...
Oh, so the cracked version that inevitably comes out will actually have decent performance? Adorable. Can't wait. It's often been the case that pirated versions are objectively superior to the crippled originals, but I don't think I've ever seen a case as blatant as this.
Talk by CD Projekt's CEO about not using DRM, and dealing with piracy: https://kotaku.com/some-real-talk-on-piracy-from-a-witcher-3... Their approach always made so much more sense to me.
I assume, since most revenue of major established game franchises is actually made in the first month, that it's probably worth it to add the DRM. If you can delay your game getting cracked for a few weeks by using some obscure complex DRM, you've already recouped most of your investment and are in the clear. Single player (blockbuster) games are probably one of the few industries where I would say piracy does matter…
[Citation needed]
Oh, so the cracked version that inevitably comes out will actually have decent performance? Adorable. Can't wait. It's often been the case that pirated versions are objectively superior to the crippled originals, but I don't think I've ever seen a case as blatant as this.
As far as I know, the "crack" for Denuvo, simply emulates the correct server responses, so the game can run normally. So unless the dev remove the DRM themselves, everyone loses...
This is why I don't buy games with DRM other than steams default DRM (although I mostly play games on PS4 nowadays anyway) and why I generally tend to avoid Ubisoft games (amongst others). I might buy a second hand copy at some point, or if its very heavily discounted, but I'm certainly not pushed to get this game, especially with this news.
I wait until big games like the Witcher series hit GoG.com. That means I miss out on a ton of AAA games, but I'm not a hardcore gamer so it's no big deal. Most of my time gaming right now is split between catching up on late 2000s titles like the Crysis and Saint's Row series, and on open world games like Rust.
This is why I don't buy games with DRM other than steams default DRM (although I mostly play games on PS4 nowadays anyway) and why I generally tend to avoid Ubisoft games (amongst others). I might buy a second hand copy at some point, or if its very heavily discounted, but I'm certainly not pushed to get this game, especially with this news.
> This is why I don't buy games with DRM other than steams Valve did an amazing job at building their reputation (by doing things the right way.) Very few can do DRM without pissing off people.
The switch from WON to Steam basically destoryed a huge part of the Counter Strike community (for example you couldn't play older versions anymore like 1.5)
Also Valve was one of the first company that required an online activation for a single player offline game (HL2). It was unheard back then.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I assume, since most revenue of major established game franchises is actually made in the first month, that it's probably worth it to add the DRM. If you can delay your game getting cracked for a few weeks by using some obscure complex DRM, you've already recouped most of your investment and are in the clear. Single player (blockbuster) games are probably one of the few industries where I would say piracy does matter…
>A pirate is not always a buyer, but gamers are notorious for not paying if they can. But they often will if they can't. [Citation needed]
Oh, so the cracked version that inevitably comes out will actually have decent performance? Adorable. Can't wait. It's often been the case that pirated versions are objectively superior to the crippled originals, but I don't think I've ever seen a case as blatant as this.
It's mostly the paying customer who ends up with the burden. I would really like to know the train of thought behind it because for me that is just plain weird. It's the same when you buy a movie or a television show on DVD/BR. You first get the traditional FBI warnings (that as a non US citizen doesn't apply to me) and if you are lucky you get a 3 minute unskippable scenes about how piracy is the equivalent of murde…
I don't know why media companies insist on punishing paying customers.
