Far Cry: Primal & Rise of the Tomb Raider Will Be Protected By Denuvo Anti-Tamper

Chacranajxy said:
That is.... quite the leap in logic.
Click to expand...
I mean, couldn't one just as easily argue for just the opposite? With piracy not being a concern, publishers can put in the bare minimum effort needed to get the game running and for it to satisfy the lowest common denominator, and anything extra that normally could have deincentivized piracy would now be for garnering goodwill at best. (Not that I believe that things are that black and white or simple. I don't buy into it, personally.)
 
prudislav said:
Pretty sure Xcom2 will have some form of steam's CEG antitampering solution which is not as hardcore and fishy.

About the "jurnous" - yeah really strange - most likely just denuvo marketing team in full force .
Click to expand...

Yeah, if they're using whatever functionality Steam provide when I buy a game that is Steamworks, then I know what I'm buying into. But it's a completely different thing if other gatekeepers are going to have to permit me playing my purchase, even long after that purchase has been made.

If this becomes more and more used in games, someone like RPS or Kotaku needs to try and provide answers for us on how exactly that works, and answers that's better then "it's kinda like DRM, but not really like DRM".
 
luchifer said:
this is really great news, hopefully more people buying original instead of cracked will meant better pc ports from console games, as well as DS4 official support, among several other benefits that currently arent worth the investment.
Click to expand...
Just because people aren't able to pirate the cracked version doesn't mean they'll buy the legal version.
This was theorized before but we're seeing it now with Just Cause 3 and how sales aren't really increasing that much just because you can't pirate it.

Also, Denuvo isn't cheap either. Currently, only major AAA publishers can afford it and even they might decide it's not worth the investment if sales aren't moving either way with it.
 
this shit about leaving crap on your comp after being uninstalled? wtf? and saying that we (ubi) are not responsible for anything it does, is a big red flag and complete horseshit.
 
Chris23 said:
So Lara is pretty much protected at this point?
Click to expand...

Rtd0qf0.gif
.
 
Chris23 said:
So Lara is pretty much protected at this point?
Click to expand...
Far Cry Primal 100% denuvo confirmed at this point in its eula.
Lar still just a rumour based on the usage on JC3 and some image without the actual suuport site on codefusion.technology site which denuvo uses as support page - but Anno 2205 has a site there too, but has not denuvo
 
NDP_Mulcair said:
Why is a 6 month time delay for pirates such an inherently bad idea?

Or are you going to start telling me that there are absolutely ZERO immoral bastards out there who have the means to purchase PC software but don't?

Because that's ridiculous. Sure, some people have legitimate reasons for pirating software. But others don't, and those are the people who shouldn't have access to free software the same day as legitimate, paying customers.

I have no sympathy for people who have no interest in supporting game developers, and I don't think I have to be a "Denuvo CEO" to be justified in my beliefs.
Click to expand...

Denuvo dosn't work as a "6 month delay for pirates", that's not the intention and neither is the reality, It would be nice if publishers actually disabled Denuvo after 6 months, but is not happening either. For now most big profiles games has been cracked under Denuvo, but I think there are some there that wasn't, that's bad not for pirates mind you, but for preservation of software, there are a good number of games lost on the IP limbo that will be lost forever.

There are inmoral bastards that have the money to buy games but they pirate otherwise, but that works under the assumption that they would buy the game if it wasn't pirated, I mean maybe a small porcentage, but if people don't buy games is because they don't see the value of spending 50-60 dollars/euros on a game, and they won't not because they don't have the money, because simply they don't see that product as valuable as you or me.

Denuvo brings more potential harm than actual benefits, modding and preservation are 2 of the pillars that PC gaming is built from and that piece of software goes directly against them. And I don't think any moral benefits or anecdotal evidence on more sales is sufficient to justify is existence, seeing the negative it brings.
 
“CERTAIN FILES OF THE ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY MAY REMAIN EVEN AFTER THE PRODUCT IS UNINSTALLED FROM YOUR COMPUTER. “
Click to expand...

That's fucking atrocious, and (potentially) sketchy as shit.
 
epmode said:
I've heard that Denuvo can be configured the same way. Caused some trouble with a recent GTA5 patch.
Click to expand...

Everyone seems to have heard lots of things about Denuvo. I'm open to be proven wrong, but as far as I can tell, none of it is true. And I've looked into this pretty extensively.

The thing is, this kind of stuff is actually contrary to the way that Denuvo works. Denuvo isn't DRM, it's an anti-tamper technology. It PROTECTS DRM systems that are already in place. It makes it so that hackers/pirates can't simply strip out the DRM from a game.

The DRM that Denuvo protects can be configured to do whatever the publisher wants. A Denuvo game could be always-online, if the publisher wanted, and Denuvo would stop pirates from making an offline version, but Denuvo is not the cause of the online requirement.

Is this a distinction without a difference? I can see why someone might say that, but I think it's important to blame the source of a problem instead of shooting the messenger. Blame Rockstar for making their game require an online check after every patch (Although, be aware that this is hardly uncommon). Don't get upset with Denuvo—or start refusing to buy Denuvo-protected games, or something—because of something stupid Rockstar did. By all accounts, Denuvo appears to be a very good technology that does what it's supposed to with pretty much no side effects for consumers. There's a discussion to be had regarding game preservation, but I suspect we'll eventually find ways around that.
 
Necromanti said:
I mean, couldn't one just as easily argue for just the opposite? With piracy not being a concern, publishers can put in the bare minimum effort needed to get the game running and for it to satisfy the lowest common denominator, and anything extra that normally could have deincentivized piracy would now be for garnering goodwill at best. (Not that I believe that things are that black and white or simple. I don't buy into it, personally.)
Click to expand...

I don't think you can reasonably make that argument. DRM theoretically leads to more sales, as far as the publisher is concerned, but why would better porting efforts matter? Except for the extreme cases like Arkham Knight, I don't think there's been much to suggest to developers that people would suddenly buy their game if they offered something extra to customers. Improving a game isn't going to help them capitalize on a reduction in theft -- they're two totally separate matters.
 
Wowfunhappy said:
The thing is, this kind of stuff is actually contrary to the way that Denuvo works. Denuvo isn't DRM, it's an anti-tamper technology. It PROTECTS DRM systems that are already in place. It makes it so that hackers/pirates can't simply strip out the DRM from a game.
Click to expand...

If Denuvo has to phone home to Denuvo servers, what's the difference really?
 
Right now I don't really care, but I do worry about the future.

Let's hope Denuvo makes a fuckton of money with their stuff so they never, ever go out of business.
 
Growing up in the 90's and early 2000's, pirating PC games was the easiest and fastest way to get the latest games at the time. It wasn't about money at all, we just wanted to play the games as soon as we could. Ever since Steam started selling games, nobody I know pirates games anymore. It's been like this for almost ten years.

Is this even an issue anymore? Do PC games leak to pirate sites weeks ahead of release these days?
 
It won't bring them the extra sales that they predict but we'll see how it goes.

Hopefully Denuvo doesn't kill off modding and preservation all together, because I can see almost every game using it down the line.
 
koutoru said:
Just because people aren't able to pirate the cracked version doesn't mean they'll buy the legal version.
This was theorized before but we're seeing it now with Just Cause 3 and how sales aren't really increasing that much just because you can't pirate it.

Also, Denuvo isn't cheap either. Currently, only major AAA publishers can afford it and even they might decide it's not worth the investment if sales aren't moving either way with it.
Click to expand...

Or maybe people didn't buy Just Cause 3 because it's a mediocre game flooded by many other better games, and the sales could have been even worse without the DRM.
 
I think fewer people would complain about DRM designed to prevent piracy if developers then went ahead and patched out said DRM once it was cracked. But they don't.
 
Stumpokapow said:
I think fewer people would complain about DRM designed to prevent piracy if developers then went ahead and patched out said DRM once it was cracked. But they don't.
Click to expand...

I definitely would. Or if they removed it after a certain length of time. I'm all for publishers and developers getting as many sales as possible, but for the love of god make it possible to play old games without issue and not have to deal with this DRM garbage.
 
For Ubisoft games on Steam: Steam > Uplay (I have it installed but never used it in my life) > Denuvo.

Isn't this little too much? I mean they should get rid of one thing, and if you ask me it's Uplay. :D
 
The tears of the pirates are delicious, i am going to visit some pirates/torrent sites the day that the game comes out to read the comments. They cry more than legitimate users, lolol.
 
Wowfunhappy said:
It doesn't. Feel free to prove me wrong with a source, but there's LOT of BS out there regarding Denuvo.
Click to expand...

No what I'm looking for is a source that clearly specifies what it doesn't phone home. I would love to be proven wrong, because it would mean that I wouldn't have the issue with Denuvo games that I have now.
 
There is so much misinformation going around regarding Denuvo, just people regurgitating bullshit from others where there is no factual basis. As it stands, there is no downsides to it - whatsoever. If the developer chooses to implement modding, that again has no basis with Denuvo.
 
Gbraga said:
Right now I don't really care, but I do worry about the future.

Let's hope Denuvo makes a fuckton of money with their stuff so they never, ever go out of business.
Click to expand...
And if they go out of business they will just go into hiding abd reapear under different name with different solution again (Sony DADC[securom]=Denuvo[antitamper] , similar deal is with starfoce and actcontrol) and they will claim the new solution is harmless, has nothing to do with their previous work, and is not DRM or anti-tampering SW, because semantics reasons. And this circle will continue till the day we all get online-only brainchips
 
diamount said:
There is so much misinformation going around regarding Denuvo, just people regurgitating bullshit from others where there is no factual basis. As it stands, there is no downsides to it - whatsoever. If the developer chooses to implement modding, that again has no basis with Denuvo.
Click to expand...

agree on the misconception part, it is basically invisible to the end consumer but has been propped up as this entity that spins hard drives like a dj while racking up a monster call bill phoning home.

however one downside is the preservation angle, publishers don't seem to care for that so its unlikely they will remove the tech from a game once it has accrued the majority of it's sales. but having said that, i'd be surprised if in 5-10 years these current games are still not able to be cracked by pirates and as a result be preserved.

RobNBanks said:
“CERTAIN FILES OF THE ANTI-TAMPER TECHNOLOGY MAY REMAIN EVEN AFTER THE PRODUCT IS UNINSTALLED FROM YOUR COMPUTER. “.
Click to expand...

programs leave traces behind all the time with leftover files and entries in the registry, this doesnt sound like anything more than that
 
Lanrutcon said:
Um.
Click to expand...

Sure, it's an eventuality. But Just Cause 3 still has not been cracked yet, the stresses of doing so will lead to those groups not even attempting with Denuovo games - I'm not even sure what they gain from cracking in the first place except the ego boost.
 
iNvid02 said:
agree on the misconception part, it is basically invisible to the end consumer but has been propped up as this entity that spins hard drives like a dj while racking up a monster call bill phoning home.
Click to expand...

That it's invisible to most customers isn't neccesarly a good thing.

Those of you that feel confident about what it does and what it doesn't, what sources are the best ones to use if you want to read up about it? I know what it wants to achieve, but I'm still not completely clear about all the steps it takes to achieve that.
 
diamount said:
Sure, it's an eventuality. But Just Cause 3 still has not been cracked yet, the stresses of doing so will lead to those groups not even attempting with Denuovo games - I'm not even sure what they gain from cracking in the first place except the ego boost.
Click to expand...

That's a laughable opinion. No offense, but consider why they do this in the first place. It's not money or personal gain. If Denuvo get widely adopted it'll be a huge target for the talent. Taking apart the unsinkable DRM will draw more and more attention until it's conquered. The longer it flew under the radar the longer it would have stayed uncracked.

Personally I don't care one way or the other (if Denuvo really doesn't cause issues), but I'm not naive enough to believe it'll last the year.
 
Lanrutcon said:
That's a laughable opinion. No offense, but consider why they do this in the first place. It's not money or personal gain. If Denuvo get widely adopted it'll be a huge target for the talent. Taking apart the unsinkable DRM will draw more and more attention until it's conquered. The longer it flew under the radar the longer it would have stayed uncracked.

Personally I don't care one way or the other (if Denuvo really doesn't cause issues), but I'm not naive enough to believe it'll last the year.
Click to expand...

It's already been a year since the first game using Denuvo (DA:I) was released. When a major group admits defeat then that will only show its effectiveness to publishers, no? As already proven with Ubisoft tacking it on.
 
diamount said:
There is so much misinformation going around regarding Denuvo, just people regurgitating bullshit from others where there is no factual basis. As it stands, there is no downsides to it - whatsoever. If the developer chooses to implement modding, that again has no basis with Denuvo.
Click to expand...

There's definitely downsides to it, claiming they don't exist is ridiculous. It will ultimately work against game preservation,w ithout a doubt, and it does prevent some kinds of modding. (and I don't see how developer intention has anything to do with it. Most games don't officially support modding but people mod them anyways)
 
CecilRousso said:
That it's invisible to most customers isn't neccesarly a good thing.

Those of you that feel confident about what it does and what it doesn't, what sources are the best ones to use if you want to read up about it? I know what it wants to achieve, but I'm still not completely clear about all the steps it takes to achieve that.
Click to expand...

being invisible is good in the sense that it doesn't impede the end consumer when they are trying to play their game, but yes it could be more transparent, but the problem is the specifics have not been made public for obvious reasons, they are only known to denuvo and presumably its clients, in a nutshell its encryption which prevents tampering with the game's original DRM. this eurogamer interview was a good read, i think the most salient point in there is that they themselves dont consider it to be undefeatable, just immenseley more difficult for pirates than usual.

toddhunter said:
Downside? Having Ubisoft games locked away and unplayable forever seems like a major boost for gaming and the planet as a whole.

This is an amazingly nice move from them.
Click to expand...

terrible opinion is terrible
 
Stumpokapow said:
I think fewer people would complain about DRM designed to prevent piracy if developers then went ahead and patched out said DRM once it was cracked. But they don't.
Click to expand...
Whaaa... What kind of message would that send? If people want to risk downloading potentially shady cracked executables then more fool them. Saying "here world, we removed all copy protection" risks legitimising the pirates, enables casual piracy, and creates extra work for companies many of whom are already struggling with costs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

LTTP: Tomb Raider (2013)
16
556
Gamerguy84 replied
Ace Combat or Tomb Raider which one will release there next game first.
23
428
Durin replied
Kingdom Come: Deliverance II planning to use Denuvo Anti-Tamper and will not be launching on GOG day one.
News Platform 
14
2K
Gp1 replied
Tomb Raider Pinball FX Announced
News 
4
164
Madflavor replied
Amazon Tomb Raider seems to be based on Angelina Jolie
Opinion 
26
406
Shaki12345 replied
Top Bottom