Wednesday, November 25th 2020

Denuvo DRM Pricing Structure Specific to Crysis Remastered Leaked, over $100k for a Year

The Denuvo game copy-protection technology has been a controversial piece of gaming technology since its inception. It enables a game to remain copy protected (and rake in sales) for just as long as pirates don't figure out how to crack it. In even the pre-orders and the few days following release, the developer hopefully makes a return on their investment, and profit. There on, the developer is at the mercy of either the consumer's good conscience (of honestly paying for their proprietary software), or for features of the game that simply won't work with a crack, such as multiplayer gaming on official/ranked servers. Fine and dandy, if not for several reports of sub-optimal Denuvo implementations adversely affecting game performance. Do check out our Denuvo performance-impact article that gets into the nuts and bolts of the DRM solution.

A leaked contract document signed by Denuvo and Crytek CEO dug up by FCKDRM reveals what Crytek paid for Denuvo, and what the DRM's typical pricing structure looks like. It calls for a flat protection fee of 126,000-140,000 Euros for the first 12 months, 2,000 Euros each month following the first 12 months, an additional 60,000€ flat fee in case the game sees more than 500,000 activations in 30 days, a 0.40€ surcharge on activations on the WeGame platform, and 10,000€ for each additional storefront (if the game is being sold in more than one online storefront platform).
Source: FCKDRM (Reddit)
Add your own comment

34 Comments on Denuvo DRM Pricing Structure Specific to Crysis Remastered Leaked, over $100k for a Year

#26
DeathtoGnomes
Vya DomusPublishers can just ... not use Denuvo.
Publishers could listen... to the community at large too. You know, those that cant meet minimum specs because of Devil-nuvo.
Posted on Reply
#27
evernessince
DeathtoGnomesI think there are those that just dont buy games with Denuvo, I for one do not. I have more than enough ongoing games to to keep me busy enough.
Well it does increase load times by an average of a minute and has in-game performance penalties.
Posted on Reply
#30
hardcore_gamer
lexluthermiesterThere are some cracks that have been done but not released publicly. Sorry, "those boys" are wrong, as are you. Let it go.
Posted on Reply
#32
bobsled
lexluthermiesterNo. Echo;
The burden of proof lies with you. Telling people to shush when they've actually posted something backing claims is essentially admitting you were wrong, but without actually owning it - very cool!
Posted on Reply
#33
lexluthermiester
bobsledThe burden of proof lies with you. Telling people to shush when they've actually posted something backing claims is essentially admitting you were wrong, but without actually owning it - very cool!
I didn't tell anyone to "shush", I said "Let it go." as in "I'm not going to explain further. It's not worth my time." Believe whatever you want. The correct info is out there to be found,. If you don't want to take the time and effort to go find it, fair enough, that's on you. Live in ignorance. I'm not holding your hands on this issue.
Posted on Reply
#34
GrayAx
Groups making cracks for high profile games that stay secret for up to a year or longer makes no sense, any single leak would mean it would spread across the net like wildfire due to demand. You can't both say that something is so secret that the most public scene doesn't know about it, yet also claim that it's something we can find it if we look. Because people more engaged in the scene would make it public asap. If any TPU-poster could find proof of this, then anyone on reddit, etc, could as well.

It only takes 1 person who posts it to reddit for the upvotes and gold dopamine hit to spread the crack, after all.

On top of that, if your claim is right, then that still supports my original post on DRM being effective:
If only shadowy, private cracking groups that never go public crack the games at release, and the public mainstream scene doesn't get it, then that is the same as a game being uncracked in practice.
The point of DRM is after all to make (illegal) redistribution of a game impractical, or slow the process down to encourage game sales. (In theory, anyhow.)
If RDR2 was cracked 2-3 days after release, but so few people has access to the crack that it wasn't publicly known, and the public mainstream scene didn't get the crack until a year later, then that's the same as the DRM holding up for a year. (In which case it was complex enough that somehow only shadowy, private groups managed to break it, but none of the mainstream groups.)

After all, it's reasonable to assume that the majority of people pirating titles would be doing it through the most mainstream and public channels.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Jan 5th, 2025 23:02 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts