Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
5 
Report this post
Whoever at SEGA which thought it'd be a good idea to try using it again must be eating their socks right now.
Noone cares what Joe Average on the internet thinks. Buy the thing and play. Or don't play and shut up. Simple.
Anyone standing in a store yapping about "everyone buying this thing is an idiot" will get kicked out.
While not publicly disclosing the exact number of sales, Valve actually shares quite a lot of useful data allowing us to make accurate estimations. For the record, Two Point Hospital sold around 1.49 M copies with an all-time peak concurrent players of 34009 while Two Point Campus sold around 154,8 k copies with a concurrent players peak of 7553 in the same time span.
If you really like this game, you need to realize that turning away potential customers with your attitude isn't exactly the best way to insure a long life cycle and a steady stream of new content. Denuvo is just as off-putting for quite a large number of people and I'm firmly convinced this game would have sold way better without it, just like the first one.
expecially when a DRM is effective, like denuvo. cause it often needs several weeks before it gets cracked.
and if you come now with "denuvo kills your SSD, gpu,cpu,hdd and overall any hardware in your pc" you´re simply wrong. noone ever proven that it was actually the DRM´s fault and not just a 10year old SSD. all peoples say is "denuvo writes on your SSD" yea, every other game does that too, even more agressively then denuvo ever would do (aka the tons of autosaves which happen on a lot of games all 10~30 minutes, why are you not scared that this would kill your SSD? denuvo writes maybe all 3 days a new verification key, but not all 10~30 minutes, like a game autosaves onto your SSD/HDD) for example: windows writes nonstop files on your SSD, changes security protocols and other things which running in the background. look into your event viewer, you would be surprised about the massive amount which gets written there every few seconds vs denuvo which maybe writes once all 3~7 days. why dont you delete windows from your PC to protect your SSD? if you are scared about denuvo writing onto your SSD should you look into other things which are by far more agressive when it comes to writing stuff and using your SSD. you would never start a game again if you are scared about that something "uses" your SSD.
the only thing which denuvo really affects is everynowandthen performance. those peoples which complain about it have often a potato PC, aka upgraded their PC´s not in years and wonder why the game has low fps or having a horrible optimized rig with components in there where tech nerds would facepalm themselfs into the next universe.
btw, am not defending the DRM, i dont like it much either. its justnonsense what some peoples say about denuvo on the internet and often are it just peoples which dont have the money to buy the game and wait desperately that the game gets cracked, meanwhile flame they the forums with these topics. and then, when it finally happened and denuvo got cracked are they happy and say how badly the DRM protected the game. even tho it did it for i believe 3 weeks before someone was successfull. more effective then any other DRM. hence why devs/publishers often choose denuvo.
Besides, Steam itself is a DRM and pretty effective, actually. So, why adding another protection to the game? Protection that can alienate potential buyers? It just makes no sense to me.
Also, Peno's comment about Steam DRM's effectiveness was aimed at the fact that contrary to Denuvo, Steam's DRM offers a plethora of service incentivizing a purchase. You can't force people to buy games, it's not a necessity. Convincing them to do so with addtional services and features pirates can't have - like Elden Ring or Cyberpunk 2077 for instance - seems a way more sensible approach to me and why Steam's DRM appears to be more successful at curbing piracy than Denuvo's value substracting "solution".
again, the sole purpose of a DRM is to protect the game for a certain amount of time, desireably until the game made enough money. which DRM gets used doesnt matters.
denuvo is just one of those DRM´s which is one of the most effective DRM´s. even after the game got cracked need you to choose between the risk getting possibly infected with a crypto miner (which is nowadays the thing with cracked games where the crackers putt crypto miners into it) or other ♥♥♥♥ which you dont want on your PC OR buying the game.
like, denuvo protected games often need 2 weeks+ to get cracked.
ofcourse, a person which wants to pirate the game or doesnt has the money probably waits until the game is cracked.
but, everyone else which doesnt wants to wait will probably cough up those 90$ about which you are talking. denuvo even sometimes achieved to protect some games for months before someone finally managed it to get rid of it cause it sits often deep within the executable etc. its usually easy to find but hard to remove without causing a lot of trouble within the game which needs lots of experience. not to mentition that the majority doesnt even cares about denuvo that much. its often just the peoples which dont have the money to buy it which complain or well, those peoples which want to pirate it but god frigging denuvo again. again 2weeks+ of work to get rid of it XD.
the steam DRM would be gone within minutes. he was saying that the steam DRM is effective but it really isnt.
it is true that games often run better without denuvo but that denuvo destroys hardware or SSD´s/hard drives is simply wrong. like i said, noone ever proven that denuvo was the culprit of a killed SSD/HDD or GPU. anything else on your PC writes/overwrites stuff a hundred times more onto ya SSD then denuvo would ever do.
peoples which want the game on day 1 would do that and dont want to wait until the game gets pirated. or peoples which are fans and want to keep the frenchise alive which peoples which pirate the game would otherwise destroy
theres no technical barrier, you can still start the game like any other game. if your PC cant handle it is that your fault. upgrade your PC.
like you can see matters it how strong the DRM is. hence why devs/publishers often choose it. the incentive to buy named i already, there are those which want the game on day 1, doesnt matters at what cost+ the rest i´ve said.
i mentitioned that part, steams DRM is not effective, then again. if i would write down how easy it is to start a steam game without even owning it would i get nose bapped from the mods here. steam offers no service at all+you need to be always logged in to even start a game, why are you not complaining about that part? but complaining about the part with "ya need to be online with the denuvo DRM" so, it matters with denuvo? but not with steam? weird. ya need to be online with the denuvo DRM and you need to be online with the steam DRM ... theres literarly no difference.
true but i never said that. you could always wait until it is cracked while everyone else plays it already and the internet probably spoilers the heck outta it torwards you =D.
and now to the rest
noone cared about elden rings online feature, infact. its more a hindrence then it is something to convince you to buy it, except you are a troll and like it to kill other peoples game experience. cyberpunk had nothing to offer either aside from the horrible bugs which got in newer versions fixxed. then the part that you say that steams DRM curbs piracy easier then denuvo is simbly wrong.
again, you can go around steams DRM around within minutes.
so, a person which cracks games can stop a games income with only a steam DRM within minutes while he/she would need against a denuvo DRM probably several days to weeks and maybe even months.
btw, i say that again aswell, i dont defend denuvo, nor defend i any other DRM. for example, what they did with the new star wars is horrible. all i am talking about is that denuvo is one of the most effective DRM´s which protects a game relatively good against piracy vs other DRM´s. if it is worth it or not doesnt matters here because that only matters for the devs/publishers if it is worth it to choose denuvo as DRM despite of its bad reputation, not for you, because its not you who either makes or looses money because of it x3.
are you happy now?
Equating people who want DRM-free games with people who support theft is a strawman argument. People who object to DRM are not advocating for theft, but rather for the right to fully own and control the products they purchase. In the same manner, suggesting that the only reason to pirate a game is impatience or a desire to destroy a franchise is a false dichotomy. There are many reasons why people pirate games, including financial barriers, lack of access, and ethical objections to DRM.
Claiming that there are no technical barriers to running games with DRM is untrue. DRM can cause compatibility issues with certain hardware configurations, and can also require an internet connection or other forms of authentication that may not be available to all users. Denuvo itself caused issues with authentication in the past when their servers were down, when they forgot to renew their domain name and currently causing issues to Steam Deck users due to imposing installation limits. On the other hand, Steam offers a very robust offline which allow playing even in the unlikely event of Valve closing their servers.
Arguing that the strength of DRM is directly correlated with the incentive to buy the game is also flawed. Most consumers are willing to purchase games even with weak or no DRM, while others may be dissuaded from buying a game with overly restrictive DRM. DRM-free titles dwarfs the number of games with DRM is the list of all times best sellers on PC.
Comparing the effectiveness of Steam's DRM to Denuvo's is problematic, as they are different systems with different goals and methods. It is also not accurate to claim that Steam offers no service, as it provides many features for users and developers alike such as cloud saves, social features, automatic updates, gamepad drivers, family share, remote play, etc... Valve believes in the carrot, not the stick - providing many incentives where Denuvo provides none. It's hard to deny the effectiveness of their method considering the place they're in right now.
Finally, arguing that the value of Denuvo's effectiveness in preventing piracy is solely determined by the decision of developers and publishers is misleading. Consumers also have a stake in the matter, as DRM can impact the usability and accessibility of the products they purchase.
hence (again) why denuvo gets often choosen from bigger devs/publishers.
and well exacty, but thats nowadays not longer a techical barrier. nowadays has everyone with a PC internet. if someone has not internet, own they simply not a PC most of the time. with other words would be the PC alone a "technical barrier"
but then again.
most denuvo haters complain about the fact "you need to be online to play the game"
but for some reason is everyone fine that the steam DRM does exactly the same.
i mean, look at OP. he asks specificly if the game is offline playable.
while you can play game while steam is in offline mode does steam the same.
having steam too long in offline mode causes trouble aswell but noone complaints about it and why? because valve does this since release, everyone is used to it.
if the steam API in your game folders getting not updated every once in a while (i think the limit is 3 months) will it prevent you from starting the game too.
the only fair point here is that denuvo is way more agressive with this then the steam DRM and even more worse, it can lead to unplayable if devs forget to patch it out after the service ends.
but technicly could the same happen with steam. if valve ever shuts steam down have ya probably about 3 months left until ya cant start your games anymore except valve does something to prevent this.
The idea that the Steam client is inherently DRM and that all games on Steam use it is a die-hard misconception. Yes, a lot of games do use the optional DRM service that is available with Steamworks but there are a lot of games on Steam to begin with and most games do not. Sometimes even in the AAA marketspace.
Contrary to Denuvo, Steamworks and the optional DRM it offers have no built-in expiration timer: Bar human error, a glitch or a publisher implementing their own DRM, you can stay offline indefinitely on Steam and keep enjoying your games for as long as you want. Plus, even though they do not advertise that fact, Steam also sells some DRM-free games.
That is why, associated to dozens of value-adding services, Steam is tolerated, even appreciated by hundreds of millions of users and Denuvo is not.
https://www.pcgamesn.com/steam-offline-mode-designed-be-indefinite-valve-are-working-make-it-more-robust
https://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/10/2850173019347118262/?ctp=3#c2941371547488254932
https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/List_of_DRM-free_games_on_Steam
but most games require you to have the steam app open, online or not, its a requirement.
I did not put words in your mouth, sorry if you took it that way but those were arguments as to why Valve's approach was more sensible compared to Irdeto's and you did claim that Steam required you to be online in the same way as Denuvo - something which I proved to be wrong. I think that the attitude of this industry's most successful company in regards to technological barriers holds enough weight not to be dismissed that easily.