As far as I’m concerned, this is a virus maker trying to spread propaganda about how his virus isn’t a virus.
“Listen, I have gamer friends! Heck, my best friend is a gamer! I understand you. You can totally trust me!”
There is no benefit to the player WHATSOEVER.
Well, I wouldn’t go that far, publicly announcing Denuvo support does sort of serve as a marker for horrible publishers and developers so players can avoid their games.
I think them trying to win gamers over is just going to Streisand effect the hatred instead. I don’t want 3rd party anything that I don’t elect to install, even if it doesn’t effect the performance( which I also don’t buy).
Streisand effect is when someone wants a certain piece of info hidden.
A ton of gamers are already putting Denuvo into discussion - this isn’t quieting it, it’s just giving their take (whether you care about it or believe it is up to you).
The nebulous “third party anything” sounds absurd to me though. It’s traditional for games to have 18 libraries/toolkits from SpeedTree to modeling components to renderware. Quite often half of those are badly implemented.
Just out of curiosity: How would you feel about metrics tracking, which is often 3rd party? Eg, software that tells the devs that anyone who doesn’t pick up a secret piece of armor dies at least 50 times to the first boss? When devs are following that they tend to make better decisions around design, and it’s often yet another library layer thrown on.
I’m aware the Streisand effect is specifically regarding concealing info causing way more attention drawn to it, my point is that highlighting the fact that gamers hate Denuvo and trying to change that fact will most likely only amplify the hatred.
I will be more specific I hate any software that isn’t required for a game to work. The reason why I worded it vaguely is because I’m not just talking about DRM, but anti-cheat and launchers as well (even though launchers aren’t 3rd party).
As far as metrics are concerned I’m perfectly ok with that, as long as I have the option to opt-in or at the very least made aware of it.
What it really boils down to is I don’t want any unnecessary extraneous packages with the software that I actually want. For the most part I avoid games that add these things.
Denuvo does nothing of what you mention. It’s a DRM that hurts performance and gives a shitty experience for people actually buying the games. Not wanting 3rd party programs installed on your PC is a normal stance. Even Steam is a 3rd party program that technically shouldn’t be there. It gives lots of benefits to the players though, that’s why people put up with it. Same for every shitty launcher every game studio pushes into their game.
Right - that’s why I’m confused about Kraxx’s stance. He/she generalized to not liking “3rd party anything” which just seemed ridiculous to me. One way or another, our games are built around tons of 3rd-party software. Launchers are the more visible portion of that, but there’s plenty of others.
That’s why I avoid games with launchers for the most part. I also specified what I meant by third party software, I could have worded that more concisely.
Launchers are also shit and should be eliminated. Aside from Steam who actually put in the work to make a decent one.
I never said I was in favor of launchers, either - they’re annoying. I only pointed out they’re the visible ones. I’m trying to figure out just how far the hate for “everything 3rd-party” goes. I’m trying to qualify the statement.
I’m helping by providing direct evidence that gamers hate even mild inconveniences. I have hatred in my heart and soul for the EA launcher, for the Ubisoft launcher and for any other 3rd party launcher that isn’t steam.
Anything that isn’t the game itself is worthy of hate if it does anything but enhance the enjoyment of the game.
Product manager for proprietary malware peddler attempts to convince suckers that their malware does anything other than artificially restrict users and further the cause of vendor lock-in.
There, I saved everyone a click. Now thank me for my service.
For me it’s simple: Denuvo makes game hard to play on GNU/Linux so Denuvo makes it hard for me to play games I pay for… So no, 0 benefit from this shit…
Huh? I’ve been playing Ace Attorney Investigations 2 on my Deck, that uses Denuvo.
I’m going to assume it’s more intermittent than that. However, this is also coming from someone that spent a week failing to get Linux-native apps to run on certain Linux distros so it’s sometimes hardly a surprise to run into problems.
Which games have given you a hard time? I don’t think I’ve ever chosen not to buy a game based on Denuvo’s presence, and certainly some of the games I play have had it, but the only things that have caused compatibility issues for me are the usual culprits of anti-cheat and Windows video formats.
As he mentioned, the OS is Linux specifically. Just this week they literally removed support for Linux on Battlefield 1 and there was a helpful message as to why when you tried to play the game that had previously worked fine.
I’m a firm believer that if a developer or company decides to brick your software/purchase even years down the road, they should be required to re-imburse you the price paid. It doesn’t even need to include full game closures, but like shit like this where you buy an item, then they update it which makes it so you no longer can use it should require it.
I’m also on Linux, and your link refers to anti-cheat, not Denuvo. I acknowledged the former as a problem, but I haven’t had issues with the latter.
Treating the people who buy a game as the criminals isn’t ever a positive.
I for one do appreciate Denuvo. They help me blacklist anti-consumer publishers and developers.
We aren’t even the customers for denuvo. Why are they even trying to convince us to like them. It doesn’t do shit for us.
What’s more interesting is that DRM developers don’t have enough experience with game development. They have no idea how the game code should really work for everyone to not be affected by something that is injected inside (and they are injecting a lot - some executables get inflated by more than 1 gb I think).
Because we’re the meanies who refuse to buy games that have it. We should say thank you to them and gleefully give money to games that use it
To all the “boycotts don’t matter” people: lol owned. Protest is good and just, and people do notice. Taking action makes a different so get out there and be fucking heard people.
Shitty company justifies it’s existence*
Shitty company tries to justify its existence
I’m a gamer myself, and therefore I know what I’m talking about.
It’s trickling down folks. If Ubisoft can pocket 20% more profits for their games that means you the gamer will get 20% more updates for your favorite games. Really, that’s how it works.
Can’t tell if you dropped an /s or not.
In case you didn’t: If they made 20% more profit then they didn’t spend that on updates. That’s how profit works.
I don’t think anyone on Lemmy seriously believes in trickle down economics.
I for one definitely feel like big corporations are pissing on me.
It is generous to call that only a trickle though.
See, that’s what they want you to believe. Nobody’s pissing on you, they’re taking a big fat shit and you’re in ground zero.
That must but an old comic because that middle class is way over represented.
I am going go on a limb and say thay commenter aint a bootlicker
