Denuvo Anti-Tamper (anti-piracy solution)

[ImpulsE69]

Yes the overall point is someone will suffer regardless if anyone pirates or not. When you have all 3 sectors claiming billions in losses a year due to piracy there is no way for them to actually know that. It is all speculation on their part and bumped up to make it appear worse than it is.

You don't honestly think they are magically going to each make all those billions up because those pirates are going to buy all the same merchandise do you? If you estimate that 50% of pirates are overseas in poorer underdeveloped countries, no company is going to get money that didn't exist to spend to begin with.

Let me throw out another piece that no one talks about: When you are stationed overseas in a war zone, the US government has zero issue with you paying $1 for pirated copies of movies and video games. They actually (silently)encourage it because it helps their purpose in the environment (local economy/trust) and helps soldiers morale. The reality is in these countries piracy is all they do, they pirate EVERYTHING not just movies/music/games. These people would not be buying legit if it were the only option. This has been going on for decades.

We can argue the right or wrong thing all we want, but at the end of the day, piracy is not the nail in the coffin for the entertainment industry. Ultimately it will be their own business practices that do them in.

 

[Lonyo]

I doubt the economy would collapse if everyone purchased their goods. I doubt the economy would crash if no one stole anything.

The economy would also not magically improve if no one stole anything digital. There is zero marginal cost to piracy, therefore removing piracy does not reduce any costs. It also does not increase the money available. Therefore removal of piracy does not improve the revenues of the industries, it just potentially changes the distribution of that revenue.

 

[tential]

I don't want to confuse bystander by adding to such a long post but to go even further.

DRM doesn't necessarily mean that gaming industry makes more money.

Lets go BACK to the example I made with Bill.

With Piracy:
Bill Purchases: 2 games, 4 movies 0 albums.
Pirates: 1 game, 1 movie, 2 albums
Without Piracy:
Purchases: 1 game, 5 movies, 2 albums.

Now, lets look SPECIFICALLY at the gaming industry. DRM isn't free it costs money to implement.
With Piracy, Gaming Industry gets $100 from Bill. Without Piracy, Gaming Industry gets $50 from Bill. But the cost of preventing that piracy was NOT free for the gaming industry. Denuvo had to be paid to ensure this piracy did not happen. Lets say Denuvo takes even 2% and lets just say for simplicity sake, the games are being sold directly digitally from the company and they reap all the revenue.

With Piracy, Gaming Industry gets $100 from Bill.
Without Piracy, Gaming Industry only gets $49 from Bill because they pay their 2% fee.

So the cost if Anti Piracy isn't free either. What DRM does is take money away from the entertainment industry. It allows a new industry to take their own fee from the entertainment industry despite the same money being spent there. So instead of the entertainment industry still receiving their $200 total split between gaming, music, movies (just simplifying this and leaving only these 3 industries.), we've not created a new industry that leaches off these 3 industries and now the entertainment industry only receives $196 total.

 

[Anteaus]

To add, DRM isn't always about protecting the product over it's entire life. Once upon a time, the success of a game in the eyes of its publisher was decided by total sales over it's shelf life. Today, large publishers won't even green light a project if they can't expect to recover their production costs within the first couple weeks. With titles like Call of Duty and Grand Theft Auto pushing well over 500 million in Day 1 revenue, even a one percent drop in sales due to piracy can mean many millions of lost revenue and, by extension, profit.

I'm of the opinion that DRM only hurts things, but I can understand that from a business point of view, its worth throwing a million or two at DRM if it can hold back the pirates for even a few days.

 

[ImpulsE69]

To add, DRM isn't always about protecting the product over it's entire life. Once upon a time, the success of a game in the eyes of its publisher was decided by total sales over it's shelf life. Today, large publishers won't even green light a project if they can't expect to recover their production costs within the first couple weeks. With titles like Call of Duty and Grand Theft Auto pushing well over 500 million in Day 1 revenue, even a one percent drop in sales due to piracy can mean many millions of lost revenue and, by extension, profit.

I'm of the opinion that DRM only hurts things, but I can understand that from a business point of view, its worth throwing a million or two at DRM if it can hold back the pirates for even a few days.

That is a problem with their business process. That is why the subject is skewed. They are placing blame on a generic biased guesstimate. Really it's becoming a problem across the board with the way businesses think, not just in these industries.

 

[bystander36]

"I have argued that piracy hurts the industry in a way that results in hurting gamers, be it by poorer games or more expensive games."
That's a direct quote of yours.

So I'll try to explain to you why it's not necessarily true.

Lets say we have a world in which Piracy exists (Today).
Bill consumes 3 games, 5 movies, and 2 Music Albums a year. (Consume as in he uses, not purchases).
Of this consummation, he purchases 2 games, 4 movies and 0 albums.
He pirates 1 game, 1 movie, 2 albums.

His total cost of purchases is $100 for games, $100 for movies (He goes to the theater), 0 on music.

Now, lets move to a world in which piracy is eliminated.
Bill is in a tough situation because he only spends $200 on entertainment and usually consumes 3 games, 5 movies, and 2 music albums a year. So he must cut back on his consumption since he can no longer obtain things for free.
Bill decides to still consume his 5 movies a year. This is the time he goes out with his wife (date night).
This costs him $120. He is left with $80 now. So he purchases 1 game ($50) and is now left with $30. He then purchases his 2 music albums (one for himself, one he purchases for his wife) and is now left with $0 dollars.

So whereas before, Bill purchased 2 games a year (And played 3 games a year since he pirated 1 game!), he now is able to only afford 1 game a year.

This is just an example of to show that piracy, while hurting industries, may not necessarily improve the gaming industry if removed entirely. When Piracy is removed entirely, one industry will suffer. It may not necessarily be the gaming industry, but people's purchasing tendencies will reshuffle as they get used to a new world.

This is NOT a defense of piracy. It's just simply a way to explain to you that the removal of piracy does not necessarily mean an increase in game sales.
It depends on the individual consumer and how they will substitute their consumption of goods to maximize utility (happiness), in a world without piracy. Without that knowledge you nor I have no clue which industry will benefit and which will hurt in a world without piracy. But we do know there will be winners and losers. In the example shown, the gaming industry lost out, and the movie/music industry got more sales. It could be any number of combinations but without an increase in income, either each industry will be similarly well off, or one industry will lose out while others reap benefits.

What I'm saying is pretty simple. There are many pirates out there that have plenty of money to support their habits and then some. If they had to pay, they simple would.

I'm not saying everyone will. Most would have to cut back on what they download. I also do believe that most the pirated copies of games would not become purchases, but some would.

Not everyone is forced into pirating. Some simply do it because they can. I/we just don't know what percentage that is. It's definitely not 0% as I have seen first hand in real life, that it isn't all about money.

 

[bystander36]

The economy would also not magically improve if no one stole anything digital. There is zero marginal cost to piracy, therefore removing piracy does not reduce any costs. It also does not increase the money available. Therefore removal of piracy does not improve the revenues of the industries, it just potentially changes the distribution of that revenue.

Do you seriously believe that 0% of pirated software would not have been purchased had pirating been eliminated? I guess you are just saying it will be given to another industry? I guess we should just pirate away, and give it to another industry instead?

Even if all the money just goes to another industry, piracy cannot be supported. It cannot, because as soon as it is, everyone pirates, and we lose the industry. It has to remain illegal, or we lose it all.

 

[Anteaus]

That is a problem with their business process. That is why the subject is skewed. They are placing blame on a generic biased guesstimate. Really it's becoming a problem across the board with the way businesses think, not just in these industries.

I agree. I also think part of the problem is that they spend all of their money on monolithic franchises and don't diversify. Instead of spending 100 million on one title and risking it all, how about splitting that money over 4 or 5 titles? Indie developers have proven time and time and again that game design is about balance and not all about graphics. Good gameplay and design can easily compensate for not having cutting edge graphics.

Bad games will still fail whether they cost 10 million or 100 million to make. Good games that are made for a reasonable budget will reap many times their development cost and build a following.

None of the larger developers push boundary's anymore. Valve hasn't even bothered to try since they started printing cash with Steam and EA and Activision are only interested in making the next incremental update for their tired franchises. Of course if you ask them they would say otherwise, but in my opinion, fancy cloud networking and higher resolution textures isn't the same thing.

I realize it isn't exactly the same, but large media companies like Disney know that direct to video film releases are just as important as huge theatrical releases when it comes to the bottom line. I wish the larger developers would apply this approach and take some chances for once. Divinity Original Sin was made for only 5-10 million.

 

[Annisman*]

What does it say? I encourage you to make an argument, not present someone else's.

Why do I need to make a personal argument when someone much more educated on the subject that either you or I has conveniently written out an article for us. Oh and look, I even linked it for you. Now off you go to read !

 

[ImpulsE69]

I agree. I also think part of the problem is that they spend all of their money on monolithic franchises and don't diversify. Instead of spending 100 million on one title and risking it all, how about splitting that money over 4 or 5 titles? Indie developers have proven time and time and again that game design is about balance and not all about graphics. Good gameplay and design can easily compensate for not having cutting edge graphics.

Bad games will still fail whether they cost 10 million or 100 million to make. Good games that are made for a reasonable budget will reap many times their development cost and build a following.

None of the larger developers push boundary's anymore. Valve hasn't even bothered to try since they started printing cash with Steam and EA and Activision are only interested in making the next incremental update for their tired franchises. Of course if you ask them they would say otherwise, but in my opinion, fancy cloud networking and higher resolution textures isn't the same thing.

I realize it isn't exactly the same, but large media companies like Disney know that direct to video film releases are just as important as huge theatrical releases when it comes to the bottom line. I wish the larger developers would apply this approach and take some chances for once. Divinity Original Sin was made for only 5-10 million.

Also, it isn't that they spend $100 mill on one game, it's the fact that they do and don't seem to realize there are much cheaper scenarios. Games don't need 100's of people on a CGI team. There are solo people doing better work in their basement using 'pirated' software. Just saying.

 

[tential]

What I'm saying is pretty simple. There are many pirates out there that have plenty of money to support their habits and then some. If they had to pay, they simple would.

I'm not saying everyone will. Most would have to cut back on what they download. I also do believe that most the pirated copies of games would not become purchases, but some would.

Not everyone is forced into pirating. Some simply do it because they can. I/we just don't know what percentage that is. It's definitely not 0% as I have seen first hand in real life, that it isn't all about money.

No one is saying that people are forced into pirating. I'm simply stating that your belief that the gaming industry would for sure improve if piracy 100% stopped is false. Unless you mean if piracy ONLY stopped in the gaming industry and continued in other industries.

 

[bystander36]

No one is saying that people are forced into pirating. I'm simply stating that your belief that the gaming industry would for sure improve if piracy 100% stopped is false. Unless you mean if piracy ONLY stopped in the gaming industry and continued in other industries.

It might not be reversible now, but pirating has had an adverse effect on PC gaming as the formally PC exclusive dev's have switched to console first dev's and they have sited piracy as at least part of their reason.

http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_5.html

 

[BSim500]

It might not be reversible now, but pirating has had an adverse effect on PC gaming as the formally PC exclusive dev's have switched to console first dev's and they have sited piracy as at least part of their reason

...Because console games have never been pirated? The other "part" of the reason is that "finicky" PC gamers (their words) tend to demand higher quality games and see through lame excuses made for poorly performing games "30fps is SO much more cinematic, darlings!" - brought to you by exactly the same people...

 

[davie jambo]

...Because console games have never been pirated? The other "part" of the reason is that "finicky" PC gamers (their words) tend to demand higher quality games and see through lame excuses made for poorly performing games "30fps is SO much more cinematic, darlings!" - brought to you by exactly the same people...

Nonsense just stop stealing their stuff

 

[BSim500]

Nonsense just stop stealing their stuff

I'm not. So your trolling accusation = :thumbsdown:

 

[davie jambo]

I'm not. So your trolling accusation = :thumbsdown:

Nobody that buys games cares about DRM

 

[BSim500]

Nobody that buys games cares about DRM

The same false assertion it was 5 pages ago. DRM has screwed up many games for paying customers before (limited activations, limited resale, performance slowdowns, reduced modding, unplayable during Internet outages or when travelling, entire region-locked games collections made useless when relocating to another region, etc). Denuvo overlaps with two of those (reduced modding and 5% performance loss). You need to come down off your high horse and drop your baseless trigger-happy false accusations. If someone creates a post about the effectiveness of in-store security guards and you respond, does that make you a shop-lifter? This seems to be the beginning and end of your "logic", and repeating it over & over still won't make it true outside of your own head. People also talk about hacking without being a hacker, about war crimes without being a war criminal, etc, even though they are not personally affected at all. It's what "discussion forums" are all about...

 

[davie jambo]

The same false assertion it was 5 pages ago. DRM has screwed up many games for paying customers before (limited activations, limited resale, performance slowdowns, reduced modding, unplayable during Internet outages or when travelling, entire region-locked games collections made useless when relocating to another region, etc). Denuvo overlaps with two of those (reduced modding and 5% performance loss). You need to come down off your high horse and drop your baseless trigger-happy false accusations. If someone creates a post about the effectiveness of in-store security guards and you respond, does that make you a shop-lifter? This seems to be the beginning and end of your "logic", and repeating it over & over still won't make it true outside of your own head. People also talk about hacking without being a hacker, about war crimes without being a war criminal, etc, even though they are not personally affected at all. It's what "discussion forums" are all about...

You're waffling now

I have aprox 600 games on Steam/Origin etc , not once has DRM stopped me playing a game.

 

[BSim500]

I have aprox 600 games on Steam/Origin etc , not once has DRM stopped me playing a game.

Breaking news - Your personal anecdotes are not automatically the same as many others contrary past experiences...

You're waffling now

And you're arguing for the sake of arguing (without even making any argument beyond the same recycled 'false dilemma' logical fallacy).

Reality check - still not everyone who talks about the negative aspects of DRM steals games. Dry your eyes and deal with it.

 

[davie jambo]

Breaking news - Your personal anecdotes are not automatically the same as many others contrary past experiences...



And you're arguing for the sake of arguing (without even making any argument beyond the same recycled 'false dilemma' logical fallacy).

Reality check - still not everyone who talks about the negative aspects of DRM steals games. Dry your eyes and deal with it.

Do you not understand why it is there or something ?

In my opinion the so called problems that DRM bring are totally worth it

 

[Cerb]

Nobody that buys games cares about DRM

Having had to re-install Windows due to 2 incompatible versions of SecuROM, that is complete bullshit.

Go GoG!

 

[davie jambo]

Having had to re-install Windows due to 2 incompatible versions of SecuROM, that is complete bullshit.

Go GoG!

Was this fifteen years ago or something ? Not sure why DRM would mean that you need to reinstall windows also

 

[Cerb]

Was this fifteen years ago or something ?

No, but not too recent, either. 2008-9, maybe?

Not sure why DRM would mean that you need to reinstall windows also

The point is to prevent being worked around, so it embeds itself into the OS. So, if it broke, all ODD functionality broke. No CD ripping, no CD burning, no nothing, except icons in My Computer.

Origin and Uplay certainly managed to keep games from working, too, though they might not have affected the OS.

 

[tential]

It might not be reversible now, but pirating has had an adverse effect on PC gaming as the formally PC exclusive dev's have switched to console first dev's and they have sited piracy as at least part of their reason.

http://www.tweakguides.com/Piracy_5.html

People switched to console gaming was not simply an effect of piracy despite all the silly things people say. It's simply an excuse. Console games don't have the same sales PC games do, they can be sold at a higher price on a CONTROLLED platform to more people.

Console games can hit 30 FPS, and be sold. PC Gamers won't accept that. PC Gamers demand higher quality games and thus are more ANNOYING to target. It costs more money and time to sell a game to PC Gamers. Look at AC Unity. It performs badly on consoles and PC, yet PCGamers are the ones who sit here and consistently bash the game. If the game had NEVER come out on PC, it would have had ok press, but it did and we tore it apart for the pile of junk it was. The most hyper critical of all gaming groups are PC Gamers.

@david_jumbo
Thanks, we were at least having a decent conversation before you came along with nothing to add but your accusations. Don't try to dissolve this conversation into something meaningless with accusatory phrases.
This convo is about whether DRM will increase sales for PC, not whether BSim500 or Cerb specifically pirate games or specifically have issues with DRM working on their PCs. Lets not make this a person specific conversation because none of us can prove what the others are saying about our own computers...

 

[davie jambo]

So you didn't need to re-install windows at all ? It would have created registry entries not "embeds itself in the OS"

The problem with SecuROM (from what I remember) was installing a game on multiple computers , it did not like it. That stuff is in the past where it belongs