This sort of study is almost always funded by an interested party. The authors say they have no conflict of interest, but I wouldn't take their word for it.

In any case, I just want to point out that we have effortless and nearly instantaneous access to thousands of cheap games. If it were still 1986, when the likes of Nintendo could induce wild zeal over the availability of the newest release, then ok, sure, I might accept the idea that pirates would meekly buy the object of their desire if they couldn't get it for free. But in the year of our Lord 2024, this premise seems facially absurd.

I've more or less stopped buying games, not because I pirate them instead, but because one day I realized I had some 400 games in my backlog--most acquired in seasonal sales or giveaways--and I figure I'll never get around to any of them if I keep getting more. Most of the games in my backlog are probably better than the average modern AAA title too. That last point is what takes this headline from the ridiculous to the sublime, by the way. "Our uninspired buggy clone #65 of Assassin's Creed would be IRRESISTIBLE at full price if not for torrents!" lol, nah.

Half the games that get mainstream buzz these days are scarcely games at all. The experience of "playing" them can be effectively "pirated" by watching Youtube. I've never pirated software, but press releases like this one almost make want to do it just out of spite. The market is over-saturated with alternatives to your product, the newest exemplars of which are getting worse with time, not better. The end.

lexluthermiesterExcept that the conclusions of that article are without merit.

Just the first link I found. I'm lazy that way. :p

chrcolukI myself am proof, as a young guy with no money, struggling to pay rent and buy food, I would pirate PC games I wanted to play, now as a middle aged adult with money, I buy games I want to play.

The main reasons for using pirated products in my opinion are.

1 - Cant afford to buy (so not a customer anyway with no cracked availability).
2 - Region locking, staggered releases, basically availability. (founder of steam mentioned this)
3 - Try before you buy approach.
4 - To avoid DRM, dont like the idea of a online DRM server going down, performance hit of Denuvo etc. There is people who deliberatly dont buy or buy it but then play pirated version. Netflix and co will be falling into this, as we now in an era where content just gets pulled when they dont renew streaming rights.

Its lunacy to suggest that anyone who downloads pirated media would have otherwise purchased it.

For me number 3. I have tried a lot, and have 478 games on steam now.

Yeah, uh-huh, what a shame...

Is anyone even cracking Denuvo anymore? I don't keep up with the scene but I recall there was mostly just one person and they seem to have stopped.

JWNoctisI seem to recall at least one. The offending game was removed from sale after much loud controversy. I think they learned after that.

Ah, but that was not GOG's doing and when the devs refused to provide packages that fully complied with GOG policies, it was removed and everyone who had purchased got a full refund. That was a DEV not getting it right, not GOG. What happened after that was unknown to me as I'm not a fan of the Hitman series.

DarbyOGillAnyone who cracks / pirates a game was never going to buy it to begin with, so is it really lost revenue in that sense?

From my own perspective, performance impacting DRM like DENUVO makes me not want to purchase. I'd rather wait a year, until the Devs remove it and by then I'm getting it at 50% off during a STEAM sale... so that's real lost revenue.

That's not 100% correct in 100% of cases, you say it as if it's an axiom and IT'S NOT.
In my case and most of the people i know irl who also game, we always Jack Sparrowed a game first, tried it out and then bought it if we liked it.
Even when i didn't yet have my own credit card i'd do my best to buy physical copy, or pay cash to an older irl buddy to buy it for me or gift it on steam.

On the other hand almost all the recently released games are pure shit for reasons i could elaborate on but won't, so i can't be bothered to even Jack Sparrow those, i'm slowly getting used to not owning games from certain publishers and devs, i just hope they're getting used to not getting 1 eurocent from me, if you get my drift.

P.S: piracy does more for entertainment and the end user in one year than that pos denuvo ever will.

noel_fsAssuming that someone who opened a cracked game would also buy it if it wasnt cracked is insane, and doubling down assuming that if they had bought it they also wouldnt have refunded it after 20 minutes is even more insane.

so what, drm free games are losing 40% revenue then? they must be really dumb right, oh btw and my 40% figure is accurate, independantly of how good or bad the game is they are losing 40% of renevue cause they didnt buy denuvo protection

just seems to me like someone got paid to paint a very specific picture, there is so many variables you cant just say denuvo cracks is costing money to companies when the fact that using denuvo is also costing them money cause people despise it.

Couldn't agree more. I know friends who don't buy games due to having protection mechanisms in them. Are they factoring in the percentage of people who don't buy due to protection no matter how small?

lexluthermiesterI have been a part of GOG since it's start have never seen even ONE example of DRM, ever. Sure, there are special snowflakes who whine and complain and every little slight under the sun. There will always those type of people. However, GOG does not engage in DRM, actively or passively. Ever. It's against their own mission statement and ethos.

So please stop with that nonsense.


Except that the conclusions of that article are without merit.

There have been some edge cases where you did have to phone home to the company to play OR to get all the content. Additionally, Phantom Liberty initially didn't run without a direct call to GoG. Most people didn't notice, but yeah. Additionally, if you want ALL Phantom Liberty content, you still have to phone a few third parties to get it: Amazon for example. And not just for skin, but an actual weapon type.

linux_gaming/comments/16syvvrwww.dexerto.com/cyberpunk-2077/how-to-claim-cyberpunk-2077-prime-gaming-rewards-2449077/

Let's keep it real here. GoG ain't perfect and must be kept under scrutiny much the same as any other company. Power & money corrupts. And the above, small nudges towards going online to complete your game content are the first steps of corruption. Be happy the GoG community is aware ;)

RGAFLCouldn't agree more. I know friends who don't buy games due to having protection mechanisms in them. Are they factoring in the percentage of people who don't buy due to protection no matter how small?

Another impossible to measure trend... Especially since gaming is a growth market YoY.

Only if they would release games in physical form again, with manual, booklet, map, stickers, etc, you know, like in the good ol' days/And even so, those games back then used to cost between 30 and 50$, not like now over 100$ with callous day one DLSes, extra virtual currency, and simmilar garbage tactics.

Three pages...and the gist seems to be both sides offering opinions as facts and not digging into the article itself. Here's my take:
1) This guy started with the assumption that cracking denuvo specifically has an influence on sales.
2) When you start with that assumption, and not on the assumption that anti-piracy software exists on a spectrum you confer bias to a study.
3) The bias of this author seems to be that Denuvo would significantly increase the profitability of a game...up to 12 weeks....only that's true for at most 20% based on some very generous assumptions.
4) The impact, if any at all was felt, is depressed from the assumed sales. If you have enough data you assume profitability...whereas in this day and age you can have situations like Hell Divers and the like where outside influences drive sales, and they can go off of a cliff with or without DRM.


So...the conclusion in its barest form is that if someone cracks the DRM on day one you can predict that 20% of sales disappears...based on peer and non-peer games in a variety of markets... For those old enough, it's like benchmarking an office against a smelting plant. The two aren't entirely opposite...but they're so far away from similar that the act of benchmarking them is silly...despite the fact that you can do it. Oh...but I can now "promise" that the few weeks of protection Denuvo might offer is quantifiable. If I assume 1 million in sales and $70 a pop that's $70 million down the drain, which might be $7 million in profits to the developer and publisher...so it's easy to recommend a $100k fee paid to Denuvo for their anti-piracy software...and because they don't really update it on old stuff it's fine...it is only effective for about 12 weeks before the difference is statistically negligible and you've "gotten your value" out of it, with sales flagging so hard.


Listen...I know that this may sound paranoid. Do you remember how fat was replaced with margarine, then margarine was replaced with tropical oils, then tropical oils were replaced with fats? It was a trend in food that was "based on" science, and it was supported by research that was beyond impeachment... All of that research commissioned by interest groups who had agendas, who simply asked their question to lead to the "right" answer that would benefit them. I ask because when a North Carolina researcher cites a bunch of papers that are 20+ years old, utilizing assistance from a California university...as a footnote that presumably they hoped nobody would read given this was only an "affiliation," and still coming to the conclusion that piracy is basically not detectable for a majority of the life of these things is silly.


Let me offer you an alternative that is obviously not considered. Steam libraries are DRM...period. You have the same for Uplay, MS, Epic, and most other things. Cool. What do people hate the most? It's got to be single player games on Uplay...which requires an online connection. They pull the plug, and your game is dead. In 2002 who exactly was thinking about that? In 2002 the biggest piracy was music because it could be shared across the primitive internet, it could be copied infinitely, and securom on CDs was so heinous that it brought a lawsuit when the rootkit installing DRM borked people's computers. A number 1 job on that "management." Steam, when it started, was rough. I remember hating that I had to install any third party software...but it eventually demonstrated that it was low weight and no BS...along with the offline lay modes. As the cited sources for this paper seem to want, it was "the right amount of DRM." Along came Denuvo that is promising that it cannot be cracked...until it is. Again, and again, and again. Now a "researcher" has come to the conclusion that (up to) 20% of a game's sales can be lost if the Denuvo is cracked day one...and I'm scratching my head as to why their predictions only focus on base game sales when right now the most profitable games are given away, and make their money back on microtransactions.
Halo - Microtransaction store
CoD - Microtransaction store
Fortnight - Microtransaction store
Any sports game period - Microtransaction store and Loot Boxes
Diablo - Microtransaction store
I can tell you flat out that the models of revenue used on this research are a decade old or more because if you can release a game that costs nothing the whales will come. They will make having DRM look silly....because 10 million dollars over 2 years is more profit than selling 5 million copies of a game and then just letting it be. Why is this even an argument in the age of the always connected skinner-box loot store, where Baldur's Gate 3 is a run-away success and Bethesda cannot figure out why people are pissed that their Creation Club has a $30 DLC that they sold as being comparable to Far Harbor but most people are calling cut content from a base game that should be priced at a third of what it is given its length and quality?




Let me close with a simple question. One that I have to tackle as I find that I want to spend less and less money every year because the amount of compelling games decreases...and a humble bundle subscription will buy me all of the hottest games with about a 6-12 month delay at about $1-2 a piece. With the AAA industry trying to squeeze everything out of us (profitability wise), and being surprised that their turn to always online microtransactions has produced negative results now that the average full price game comes laden with a shop meant to have you constantly kicking back something to them for minimal work, is the old model of piracy as a loss even viable? I think it is for games like Baldur's Gate...but they didn't release with DRM and still sold like crazy because they released a good game and supported it. As a comparison Elder Scrolls' next entry is something I'm skipping. That's after pre-ordering Skyrim and Fallout 4. That's watching Fallout 76...fail. That's seeing Fallout Shelter be the same level of loot box garbage that we assumed would be worst case. That's then watching them wheel out Starfield...and just crying on the inside when I heard that we'd have a universe to explore and knowing deep down that they couldn't make 12 settlements feel unique in Fallout 4...let alone thousands of worlds, after being bombarded with arrow to the knee NPC jokes. After all of this, why do I even want to spend a penny on a game that the developers thought needed protection from thieves when the real thievery has been the industry over the last two decades?

64KIt's pretty obvious that the most revenue comes from gamers buying at release or shortly thereafter. Gamers aren't a patient lot. That's why there is little point in keeping Denuvo beyond a few weeks or so.

I can't back this up with proof but I strongly suspect that the majority of pirates are people who can't afford the $60 or $70 for a game to begin with so they will never be 'lost sales' to any publisher. I do know of a good bit that can afford the games but choose to wait and get them for free and even boast about it openly on some game sites. They are the only ones that are hurting our hobby but what can be done about them?

You forget the fact that the margin AND the actual revenue is in gaming often a factor 2-3 higher simply because of NOT the amount of units sold... but the actual asking price. That's probably also a big part of the reason why the gap between cracked and not cracked closes fast, its not just gamers being impatient, the whole need to even use it quickly reduces along with the asking price of said product.

Games go on discount, and hard, and early. Some don't. But this kills the whole investigation right then and there. Revenue != units sold. There's so much data missing here to make an informed statement, its insane. This is kindergarten research, the type you often see sponsored by company X or Y. I love how some people take it for granted. 'Oh he has done stuff with numbers, must be good'. Especially in a growth market where there is NO trace of publishers or devs failing due to piracy. There is, at best, the rare occurence, and it never really occurs to successful games either. Strange, strange indeed!

lilhasselhofferThree pages...and the gist seems to be both sides offering opinions as facts and not digging into the article itself. Here's my take:
1) This guy started with the assumption that cracking denuvo specifically has an influence on sales.
2) When you start with that assumption, and not on the assumption that anti-piracy software exists on a spectrum you confer bias to a study.
3) The bias of this author seems to be that Denuvo would significantly increase the profitability of a game...up to 12 weeks....only that's true for at most 20% based on some very generous assumptions.
4) The impact, if any at all was felt, is depressed from the assumed sales. If you have enough data you assume profitability...whereas in this day and age you can have situations like Hell Divers and the like where outside influences drive sales, and they can go off of a cliff with or without DRM.


So...the conclusion in its barest form is that if someone cracks the DRM on day one you can predict that 20% of sales disappears...based on peer and non-peer games in a variety of markets... For those old enough, it's like benchmarking an office against a smelting plant. The two aren't entirely opposite...but they're so far away from similar that the act of benchmarking them is silly...despite the fact that you can do it. Oh...but I can now "promise" that the few weeks of protection Denuvo might offer is quantifiable. If I assume 1 million in sales and $70 a pop that's $70 million down the drain, which might be $7 million in profits to the developer and publisher...so it's easy to recommend a $100k fee paid to Denuvo for their anti-piracy software...and because they don't really update it on old stuff it's fine...it is only effective for about 12 weeks before the difference is statistically negligible and you've "gotten your value" out of it, with sales flagging so hard.


Listen...I know that this may sound paranoid. Do you remember how fat was replaced with margarine, then margarine was replaced with tropical oils, then tropical oils were replaced with fats? It was a trend in food that was "based on" science, and it was supported by research that was beyond impeachment... All of that research commissioned by interest groups who had agendas, who simply asked their question to lead to the "right" answer that would benefit them. I ask because when a North Carolina researcher cites a bunch of papers that are 20+ years old, utilizing assistance from a California university...as a footnote that presumably they hoped nobody would read given this was only an "affiliation," and still coming to the conclusion that piracy is basically not detectable for a majority of the life of these things is silly.


Let me offer you an alternative that is obviously not considered. Steam libraries are DRM...period. You have the same for Uplay, MS, Epic, and most other things. Cool. What do people hate the most? It's got to be single player games on Uplay...which requires an online connection. They pull the plug, and your game is dead. In 2002 who exactly was thinking about that? In 2002 the biggest piracy was music because it could be shared across the primitive internet, it could be copied infinitely, and securom on CDs was so heinous that it brought a lawsuit when the rootkit installing DRM borked people's computers. A number 1 job on that "management." Steam, when it started, was rough. I remember hating that I had to install any third party software...but it eventually demonstrated that it was low weight and no BS...along with the offline lay modes. As the cited sources for this paper seem to want, it was "the right amount of DRM." Along came Denuvo that is promising that it cannot be cracked...until it is. Again, and again, and again. Now a "researcher" has come to the conclusion that (up to) 20% of a game's sales can be lost if the Denuvo is cracked day one...and I'm scratching my head as to why their predictions only focus on base game sales when right now the most profitable games are given away, and make their money back on microtransactions.
Halo - Microtransaction store
CoD - Microtransaction store
Fortnight - Microtransaction store
Any sports game period - Microtransaction store and Loot Boxes
Diablo - Microtransaction store
I can tell you flat out that the models of revenue used on this research are a decade old or more because if you can release a game that costs nothing the whales will come. They will make having DRM look silly....because 10 million dollars over 2 years is more profit than selling 5 million copies of a game and then just letting it be. Why is this even an argument in the age of the always connected skinner-box loot store, where Baldur's Gate 3 is a run-away success and Bethesda cannot figure out why people are pissed that their Creation Club has a $30 DLC that they sold as being comparable to Far Harbor but most people are calling cut content from a base game that should be priced at a third of what it is given its length and quality?




Let me close with a simple question. One that I have to tackle as I find that I want to spend less and less money every year because the amount of compelling games decreases...and a humble bundle subscription will buy me all of the hottest games with about a 6-12 month delay at about $1-2 a piece. With the AAA industry trying to squeeze everything out of us (profitability wise), and being surprised that their turn to always online microtransactions has produced negative results now that the average full price game comes laden with a shop meant to have you constantly kicking back something to them for minimal work, is the old model of piracy as a loss even viable? I think it is for games like Baldur's Gate...but they didn't release with DRM and still sold like crazy because they released a good game and supported it. As a comparison Elder Scrolls' next entry is something I'm skipping. That's after pre-ordering Skyrim and Fallout 4. That's watching Fallout 76...fail. That's seeing Fallout Shelter be the same level of loot box garbage that we assumed would be worst case. That's then watching them wheel out Starfield...and just crying on the inside when I heard that we'd have a universe to explore and knowing deep down that they couldn't make 12 settlements feel unique in Fallout 4...let alone thousands of worlds, after being bombarded with arrow to the knee NPC jokes. After all of this, why do I even want to spend a penny on a game that the developers thought needed protection from thieves when the real thievery has been the industry over the last two decades?

Boom. This. All of it.

Vayra86There have been some edge cases where you did have to phone home to the company to play OR to get all the content. Additionally, Phantom Liberty initially didn't run without a direct call to GoG. Most people didn't notice, but yeah. Additionally, if you want ALL Phantom Liberty content, you still have to phone a few third parties to get it: Amazon for example. And not just for skin, but an actual weapon type.

linux_gaming/comments/16syvvrwww.dexerto.com/cyberpunk-2077/how-to-claim-cyberpunk-2077-prime-gaming-rewards-2449077/

That's not DRM. That's add-in marketing. Not really the same things. Cyberpunk and Phantom Liberty will play, start to finish, without the internet at all. But I digress..

Vayra86Let's keep it real here. GoG ain't perfect and must be kept under scrutiny much the same as any other company. Power & money corrupts. And the above, small nudges towards going online to complete your game content are the first steps of corruption. Be happy the GoG community is aware ;)

Agreed. Nothing wrong with being vigilant and keeping a watchful eye on things.

lexluthermiesterPhantom Liberty will play, start to finish, without the internet at all

It does now, but not initially. Check the reddit, or don't, here's the relevant stuff. Among which we can see it was never intentional...

UPDATE1: Turns out this was not an intentional change and is not DRM related.

It's a bug that occurs because the game is trying to talk to GOG Galaxy but is not getting a response.

The game does this to integrate with a number of services, including achievements, cloud saves, etc.

The game is supposed to fail gracefully if GOG Galaxy is not running, and versions up to and including 2.0 did handle this correctly. However the "hotfix" version 2.0_PhL introduced a new bug, where this is no longer handled correctly and instead the game crashes if GOG Galaxy is not running.

lilhasselhofferThree pages...and the gist seems to be both sides offering opinions as facts and not digging into the article itself. Here's my take:
1) This guy started with the assumption that cracking denuvo specifically has an influence on sales.
2) When you start with that assumption, and not on the assumption that anti-piracy software exists on a spectrum you confer bias to a study.
3) The bias of this author seems to be that Denuvo would significantly increase the profitability of a game...up to 12 weeks....only that's true for at most 20% based on some very generous assumptions.
4) The impact, if any at all was felt, is depressed from the assumed sales. If you have enough data you assume profitability...whereas in this day and age you can have situations like Hell Divers and the like where outside influences drive sales, and they can go off of a cliff with or without DRM.

<snip>

I would like to point out that, whatever you think of video game editing companies, what they consistently want is more money.

I don't think they implement any DRMs like Denuvo or others for the sheer pleasure of annoying their customers to no end.

It is because it earns them more money, and they probably have the internal data to back this claim up.

Otherwise, they wouldn't spend money on Denuvo, because it would cost more money and it goes against point #1.

Vayra86It does now, but not initially. Check the reddit, or don't, here's the relevant stuff. Among which we can see it was never intentional...

UPDATE1: Turns out this was not an intentional change and is not DRM related.

It's a bug that occurs because the game is trying to talk to GOG Galaxy but is not getting a response.

The game does this to integrate with a number of services, including achievements, cloud saves, etc.

The game is supposed to fail gracefully if GOG Galaxy is not running, and versions up to and including 2.0 did handle this correctly. However the "hotfix" version 2.0_PhL introduced a new bug, where this is no longer handled correctly and instead the game crashes if GOG Galaxy is not running.

Well, GOG Galaxy also has an emulator like the ones for Steam, it's a Galaxy(64) DLL :p :)

If ever needed... this proves it can be usefull even onthis DRM Free paltfrorm

//

Yesterday there was a Nexus's Silent Hill 2 mod to unlock the DLCs, i looked at files in archive (from download tab), it wad the Steam emulator, with the ini).

I'm still asking the same question. Is any of this still relevant if no one is cracking Denuvo anymore to begin with? It seems to me that the war is long over and Denuvo won. Note that I'm not saying games aren't getting pirated after Denuvo is removed.

qlumNot sure without the actual paper, but it would not surprise me if biasses crept in the study. For example higher budget games with similar review scores may be better protected. I don't know if there even exists good data to make this conclusion with any degree of certainty. On the other hand high profile games have more eyes on them to be cracked.

I no longer pirate games myself and have not done so for a long time but when I did, a game not being cracked meant I played a game which was cracked.

I feel like this 20% buying specific games because they are not cracked does not pass the smell test, as there are plenty of other games for pirates to play.

The term you are looking for is sample bias and yes it's entirely possible given how hard it is to piece together the information required for this study.

MacZI would like to point out that, whatever you think of video game editing companies, what they consistently want is more money.

I don't think they implement any DRMs like Denuvo or others for the sheer pleasure of annoying their customers to no end.

It is because it earns them more money, and they probably have the internal data to back this claim up.

Otherwise, they wouldn't spend money on Denuvo, because it would cost more money and it goes against point #1.

You...might be missing my point on that front. I said that now somebody in the bean counting department could use a study like this and peg a direct value to what would be "lost" without Denuvo versus what would be experienced as a defined cost. That "$7 million loss" bit. It's a direct nod to the fact that this article would be used to substantiate a loss figure...based on, presumably, an average of the time they think it takes to crack...and based on projections of units sold which are entirely based on past trends or benchmarked from titles of a similar vaguely defined genre.

Now all of the above is...being clean here...shenanigans. For the longest time this was acceptable because your market was expanding and you could use tech to shove in more. As such, ballooning budgets could be matched against costs...because most people in the industry were capable of balancing scope against resources (or they were weeded out). Now everything is open world, requires millions of sales to break even, and thus what do you benchmark against? It could be past performance...but if it's against peers you are projecting sales based on being more than a thing. Imagine a shooter, that has an open world, and crafting. You benchmark CoD, Shenmue, and Minecraft. What is the overlap? If you create a Venn diagram how many potential sales are to people in overlapping categories? How many people who would buy CoD and Shenmue would find the Minecraft elements offensive enough not to purchase?
I know this is heavy theory, and a little bit less practical, but if the take a garbage assumption of sales based on benchmarks...then assume a garbage loss percentage based off of this 20 year old data...you can reasonably present an "accurate" cost to benefit ratio for paying Denuvo for their services without ever actually coming within spitting distance of reality. You then release a flop, have Denuvo "accidentally" cracked, and blame everything on piracy. It's a numbers shell game...and I have to respect that it'll work because the executives don't have the ability to understand this industy.




I hate to say this...but the western (specifically the US) entertainment industry is dying because trash studies like this enforce bad assumptions, that are easier to hold than spending the time required to understand why the industry is burning. It happened with the photo industry. It happened with the video rental industry. It's happening with the movie and gaming industry.

I don't believe in the "artiste" vision as something inherently correct. Cloud Imperium Games is in the middle of that over-inflated promises leading to an implosion of delivery right now. What I want is for studies like this to be fair that 20+ year old data is maybe not relevant to an industry that in that time went from cartridges, to expansion packs, to horse armor, and is now homogenized and trying to introduce kids to gambling. I...just think that when you compare the trials of Napster based music piracy to Denuvo it's...well, it's silly. It's like using the mail system as a comparison against a cell phone for delivery of messages, that is accurate if you forget all surrounding context.

MacZI would like to point out that, whatever you think of video game editing companies, what they consistently want is more money.

I don't think they implement any DRMs like Denuvo or others for the sheer pleasure of annoying their customers to no end.

It is because it earns them more money, and they probably have the internal data to back this claim up.

Otherwise, they wouldn't spend money on Denuvo, because it would cost more money and it goes against point #1.

Look at the list of Denuvo games, it's more a company philosophy position than anything related to sales. The Witcher 3 had zero DRM and yet sold almost as many copies as Skyrim despite appealing to a smaller audience.

Typically companies that implement Denuvo are either greedy and don't care about customers (EA, Ubisoft) or over-controlling (Japanese companies).

64KI'm still asking the same question. Is any of this still relevant if no one is cracking Denuvo anymore to begin with? It seems to me that the war is long over and Denuvo won. Note that I'm not saying games aren't getting pirated after Denuvo is removed.

I'd say the war is still very much alive, Denuvo defeated piracy but it still hurts the quality of the gameplay for every legitimate customer. This is why many people refuse to buy games with Denuvo in them. People can still vote with their wallets by simply not buying a game, as I will by not buying Civ 7 due to it's use of Denuvo. I can't tell you how many games launched with Denevo that I was interested in buying and simply forgot about. To me, this DRM strategy appears to backfire, as it trains customers to wait. Well people end up either A) not caring B) wanting a big discount. That initial sales period is critical because hype and FOMO are big sellers. Might as well be throwing your marketing budget into the wind.

lilhasselhofferI hate to say this...but the western (specifically the US) entertainment industry is dying because trash studies like this enforce bad assumptions, that are easier to hold than spending the time required to understand why the industry is burning. It happened with the photo industry. It happened with the video rental industry. It's happening with the movie and gaming industry.

I don't believe in the "artiste" vision as something inherently correct. Cloud Imperium Games is in the middle of that over-inflated promises leading to an implosion of delivery right now. What I want is for studies like this to be fair that 20+ year old data is maybe not relevant to an industry that in that time went from cartridges, to expansion packs, to horse armor, and is now homogenized and trying to introduce kids to gambling. I...just think that when you compare the trials of Napster based music piracy to Denuvo it's...well, it's silly. It's like using the mail system as a comparison against a cell phone for delivery of messages, that is accurate if you forget all surrounding context.

The people working 8+ hours per day, every day of the week, almost every week of the year to make money for their company, are more reliable, by their actions, than any study or the opinion of a random on the internet (that has his/her own bias).

Everything is changing ? Yes, that has been the case, like, forever. Especially in the video games industry. So what ?

Yes, companies are greedy. So why would they waste money on something that doesn't earn them anything, even costing them ?

Rest assured that when you have a multi hundreds of million dollars project, pretty much everything that can be measured is measured and analyzed. Especially if said project is always connected to the internet and can report back.

Arguments about stupidity or evil are not really grounded in reality.

noel_fsjust seems to me like someone got paid to paint a very specific picture, there is so many variables you cant just say denuvo cracks is costing money to companies when the fact that using denuvo is also costing them money cause people despise it.

For me Denuvo=DBE (Don't Buy, Ever).

With so many games releasing every single day I just don't have enough time to play them all so I'm actually grateful when a company ships their game with Danuvo because that's one less game I have to worry about. Same with shady EULAs and single player games with online requirements or third party accounts like PSN.

The thing is, in every poll I've seen about Denuvo the winning argument is always "I don't like it but I can't help myself so take my money", with "Death to Danuvo" in last place with less than 10% percent of the total votes. That means there isn't nearly enough people not buying games because of Denuvo to compensate for the perceived losses due to piracy because. The instant the number of people not buying game because of Denuvo gets within 2% of the expected loss from piracy, R.I.P. Denuvo.

Killing Denuvo as a company is actually very simple:

1. Get Steam to add a new Ignore option called DRM:
   
2. Get Steam to publish statistics on ignored games by reason. This is so executives and researchers have actual data to look at instead of the guessing game they're currently playing.
3. Ignore all Denuvo games. You can find a list here: Steam Curator: Denuvo Games
4. Call attention to the statistics in social media and get reputable sites like TPU report on it.
5. Watch Denuvo die slowly over a 3 year period while their current contracts ellapse and no new clients come in.

#1 and #2 are the most difficult but can be achieved with some effort from the community. Social media helps.
#3 is the easiest once the ball is rolling. #5 takes a little patience.

In the end I don't care enough about Denuvo to do anything about it . . . but maybe someone else does. wink wink

Games, pfffffffffffff that's throw away money.

What I would like is a home/personal use AutoCad LT for non-profit use at a decent price.

Denuvo is actually quite beneficial for me. It helps me trim down my wishlist.

Vayra86Check the reddit

I generally and actively avoid reddit. It is a cesspool IMPO. Nothing personal toward you of course.

Vayra86UPDATE1: Turns out this was not an intentional change and is not DRM related.

It's a bug that occurs because the game is trying to talk to GOG Galaxy but is not getting a response.

The game does this to integrate with a number of services, including achievements, cloud saves, etc.

The game is supposed to fail gracefully if GOG Galaxy is not running, and versions up to and including 2.0 did handle this correctly. However the "hotfix" version 2.0_PhL introduced a new bug, where this is no longer handled correctly and instead the game crashes if GOG Galaxy is not running.

Weird. Never saw that. I don't use Galaxy either. Then again, I didn't get Phantom Liberty on day one. Might have been fixed by the time I got it. The explanation seems reasonable.