It is most likely due to Denuvo being harder to crack because it is a widely hated DRM. Pirates probably want to crack it on principle.
I don't think most of the pirates actually care that much about whether people download their releases. They just want the credit within the scene of cracking something that's hard to crack or leaking something before street date. For-profit pirates would be an exception to this but I doubt they're very prevalent because most people are pirating to avoid paying.
Denuvo is also an exception to piracy as a service problem being solved because it is widely hated even by non-pirates. If pirates rendered it ineffective, companies would not be using it for their games but preventing piracy is worth the backlash as far as they're concerned.
If pirates rendered it ineffective, companies would not be using it for their games but preventing piracy is worth the backlash as far as they're concerned.
There sure is a lot of very ineffective/broken non-Denuvo DRM out there, but companies continue to include that too. I doubt it's being done to stop piracy (even if only temporarily), but I wouldn't doubt that they think they're getting their money's worth. https://www.techdirt.com/2024/01/19/ubisoft-says-it-out-loud...
I don't think most of the pirates actually care that much about whether people download their releases.
they don't care about who downloads what, but you'd better believe that the market hype drives the attention and sets the rewarded merit for accomplishing the crack.
Denuvo is also an exception to piracy as a service problem being solved because it is widely hated even by non-pirates.
Maybe in an abstract Reddit community kind of way. For paying end users I doubt Denuvo comes up much. It works behind the scenes and is pretty reliable.
For paying end users I doubt Denuvo comes up much.
Unless their games run slowly, or they can't install a mod/fan patch, or they want to play offline, or they hate having some third party snooping around on their devices and collecting their data.
I am a paying user and i actively avoid games with Denuvo - there is even a curator on Steam that marks games that use Denuvo, which is helpful for doing exactly that.
The reason is simple: i want to have access to the games i bought regardless of Steam and when i buy a game there i also make a separate offline copy for my own archival. Denuvo - or any DRM really - makes that impossible. Fortunately most games (like pretty much all indie games, which are what i mainly buy these days) have no DRM at all on Steam and the few that do make enough of stink for me to know and avoid them.
So yeah, Denuvo is reliable for making me ignore a game (until it is removed at least - amusingly enough that'd often be after a bunch of patches have been released and the game had a bunch sales/price drops)
I'd probably buy a game with Denuvo if i REALLY wanted to play it (e.g. i bought Prey 2017 despite Denuvo) but i'd do that only after the price has dropped to "sandwich levels" (e.g. i bought Prey 2017 at a handful of dollars). Note that i also put money where my mouth is and when a major game that i want to play is released on GOG (which has DRM-free games) i do buy it full price or close to full price.
Steam also displays a notice on games that use Denuvo and other similar 3rd party DRM libraries. It's not super prominent, but it's better than nothing.
I do care if a game uses it. It is not an essential factor, but it can very well lead me to skip a title if it comes to my attention. And that didn't only happen once or twice that I didn't make a purchase.
That some platforms more aggressively inform you about these facts is very appreciated. Same applies to some rootkit anti-cheat software.
It might not often come up by name, but most people can tell when a game is stuttering badly, or when their frame rate is low enough to be making their experience worse.
Denuvo has often been the cause of these issues and less technical players will usually direct their annoyance at the game publisher (which is ultimately the right place) but they won't know to attribute it more directly to Denuvo itself.
Comments
It is most likely due to Denuvo being harder to crack because it is a widely hated DRM. Pirates probably want to crack it on principle.
I don't think most of the pirates actually care that much about whether people download their releases. They just want the credit within the scene of cracking something that's hard to crack or leaking something before street date. For-profit pirates would be an exception to this but I doubt they're very prevalent because most people are pirating to avoid paying.
Denuvo is also an exception to piracy as a service problem being solved because it is widely hated even by non-pirates. If pirates rendered it ineffective, companies would not be using it for their games but preventing piracy is worth the backlash as far as they're concerned.
There sure is a lot of very ineffective/broken non-Denuvo DRM out there, but companies continue to include that too. I doubt it's being done to stop piracy (even if only temporarily), but I wouldn't doubt that they think they're getting their money's worth. https://www.techdirt.com/2024/01/19/ubisoft-says-it-out-loud...
they don't care about who downloads what, but you'd better believe that the market hype drives the attention and sets the rewarded merit for accomplishing the crack.
Maybe in an abstract Reddit community kind of way. For paying end users I doubt Denuvo comes up much. It works behind the scenes and is pretty reliable.
Unless their games run slowly, or they can't install a mod/fan patch, or they want to play offline, or they hate having some third party snooping around on their devices and collecting their data.
I am a paying user and i actively avoid games with Denuvo - there is even a curator on Steam that marks games that use Denuvo, which is helpful for doing exactly that.
The reason is simple: i want to have access to the games i bought regardless of Steam and when i buy a game there i also make a separate offline copy for my own archival. Denuvo - or any DRM really - makes that impossible. Fortunately most games (like pretty much all indie games, which are what i mainly buy these days) have no DRM at all on Steam and the few that do make enough of stink for me to know and avoid them.
So yeah, Denuvo is reliable for making me ignore a game (until it is removed at least - amusingly enough that'd often be after a bunch of patches have been released and the game had a bunch sales/price drops)
I'd probably buy a game with Denuvo if i REALLY wanted to play it (e.g. i bought Prey 2017 despite Denuvo) but i'd do that only after the price has dropped to "sandwich levels" (e.g. i bought Prey 2017 at a handful of dollars). Note that i also put money where my mouth is and when a major game that i want to play is released on GOG (which has DRM-free games) i do buy it full price or close to full price.
Steam also displays a notice on games that use Denuvo and other similar 3rd party DRM libraries. It's not super prominent, but it's better than nothing.
Could you let me know which curator it is? I'm also actively avoiding any game that uses Denuvo, so I'd certainly find such a curator useful.
I am a paying user. If a game use Denuvo, I wont buy it. I am too used to this piece of crap ruining performances. Reliable ? no.
I do care if a game uses it. It is not an essential factor, but it can very well lead me to skip a title if it comes to my attention. And that didn't only happen once or twice that I didn't make a purchase.
That some platforms more aggressively inform you about these facts is very appreciated. Same applies to some rootkit anti-cheat software.
It might not often come up by name, but most people can tell when a game is stuttering badly, or when their frame rate is low enough to be making their experience worse.
Denuvo has often been the cause of these issues and less technical players will usually direct their annoyance at the game publisher (which is ultimately the right place) but they won't know to attribute it more directly to Denuvo itself.