Corporate apologetics will never not be pathetic.
What are you talking about? Nobody said anything pro-Denuvo.
Denuvo, like all DRM, deliberately punishes paying customers.
Deliberately punishing us means that Irdeto is intentionally trying to cause performance issues with Denuvo. I find this hard to believe because Denuvo isn't a product for end users, and why would they intentionally try to tank game performance?
In Denuvo's case, it also ensures pirates get a better version of the game.
That's the debate, isn't it?
The simple lesson to be learned is if you want people to pay you, give them a better experience than the pirates are providing. Steam, for example, is also DRM - but it also provides a dramatically better experience than the pirates can provide. Not too many people complain about a game being on Steam, do they? I imagine Denuvo's trying to talk because they're having a harder time selling their services than they'd like when the mere presence of this non-sense in a game is a no-go for a growing portion of Steam's paying customers.
Steam has a DRM layer, but the product itself isn't DRM. Steam's "DRM" is easily bypassed. Denuvo's entire purpose is to be DRM that is not easily bypassed. Walmart has anti-theft measures, but their business isn't anti-theft. They could hire a full-time private security company that would be way better at managing theft, although the end-user (the shoppers) would be more uncomfortable with patrolling security that's watching everything they do. The more intense you go towards security in any form, the more it will negatively impact the end-user.
The question here is whether Denuvo is responsible for performance issues across the board. If Denuvo is responsible for performance issues across the board, then the publishers/developers implementing Denuvo should course-correct and stop using Denuvo. If Denuvo is not responsible for performance issues across the board, then publishers/developers need to do a better job at optimizing their games, and people should focus their attention on the party or parties involved in the poor performance.
If they allow open postings, I imagine their Discord is closed within a day. Shit's about to get wild.
It's already closed (at least temporarily) due to too many people, and too much moderation requirements (according to them).
I am not quite certain why you responded to me with your post. Either you didn't read my initial post properly, or I am confused as to what point you thought I needed to hear.
It's because everyone knows that is a lie and just a misinformation campaign masquerading as open dialog. It is an opportunity to feel like your question is heard and feel warm and fuzzy when they come back with their contrived story customized just for you.
Everyone doesn't "know" that it is a lie. People might suspect that it is a lie, but there is no concrete proof that what they're saying is false. To have this proof, we would need identical copies of the game: one with Denuvo implemented, and the other without Denuvo implemented. There is not a single instance of this occurring. In every instance where Denuvo was removed (as far as I have seen), there were additional alterations to the base code which could have impacted performance, and in some cases were specifically implemented to impact performance. That's not a fair comparison.
As if anyone could ever ask about the reason for an issue and it would EVER actually be Denuvo even a single time. The higher ups already decided against that. Even if there is a glimmer of truth in some of their explanations, they're all exaggerated and delivered in a way that takes all blame off Denuvo that sounds like blatant bullshit even if you listen to it.
I have always been a strong proponent that corporations are not your friends. In this case, it is a black-and-white claim. Either Denuvo does cause noticeable issues with performance, or Denuvo does not cause noticeable issues with performance. Without proof (not anecdotal evidence), nobody can say one way or the other. If I were a publisher/developer and I knew Denuvo was lying about performance, I would be calling them out hardcore over this. Why isn't that occurring? In fact, the one instance I am aware of it was the opposite scenario. With Assassin's Creed: Origins, people kept blaming high CPU usage on Denuvo. Ubisoft ended up responding and outright said that Denuvo's VMProtect has "no perceptible effect" on performance, and that the game was designed to use the "full extent" of the CPU.
According to the latest reports, a new implementation of the Denuvo is causing 30-40% additional CPU usage in Assassin's Creed Origins.
www.dsogaming.com
VMProtect has “no perceptible effect,” game uses “full extent” of CPU by design.
arstechnica.com
"Denuvo doesn't cause slowdown in games because it does and the developers failed to fix it all in QA"
They can't just spew a bunch of gibberish like that PC gamers aren't so gullible to just accept anything because they said so.
It is pretty obvious to a semi-intelligent person that they are saying, "If you don't properly implement Denuvo it can cause performance issues." That's the same with any software, across any platform. Specifically, the example they gave is where the developers didn't properly QA test their game to notice major stuttering because Denuvo was tied to animation which is NOT where it is supposed to be implemented. That isn't difficult to follow.
Again, to both of you, and to anyone else who feels the need to respond to me: I am not saying that Irdeto is innocent. I am saying they haven't been proven guilty, and no publishers/developers have used this pushback from Irdeto to say, "Actually, Denuvo implementation IS harming performance." The one instance where a developer responded to this was in Irdeto's favor. Nobody is coming at this with actual facts and logic, and any facts they do present are virtually always skewed. One example being when people compared a Denuvo version and Denuvo-free version of a game that shows the Denuvo-free version has less of a performance hit, but omitting the fact that the Denuvo-free version also had additional updates that optimized performance. Again, I think it is good that Irdeto is willing to talk about this, because that should give publishers/developers ammo to say, "You slandered us. Correct your false statements or we will be forced to sue you."
