Steam'i Yükleyin
giriş
|
dil
简体中文 (Basitleştirilmiş Çince)
繁體中文 (Geleneksel Çince)
日本語 (Japonca)
한국어 (Korece)
ไทย (Tayca)
Български (Bulgarca)
Čeština (Çekçe)
Dansk (Danca)
Deutsch (Almanca)
English (İngilizce)
Español - España (İspanyolca - İspanya)
Español - Latinoamérica (İspanyolca - Latin Amerika)
Ελληνικά (Yunanca)
Français (Fransızca)
Italiano (İtalyanca)
Bahasa Indonesia (Endonezce)
Magyar (Macarca)
Nederlands (Hollandaca)
Norsk (Norveççe)
Polski (Lehçe)
Português (Portekizce - Portekiz)
Português - Brasil (Portekizce - Brezilya)
Română (Rumence)
Русский (Rusça)
Suomi (Fince)
Svenska (İsveççe)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamca)
Українська (Ukraynaca)
Bir çeviri sorunu bildirin
Tartışma Kuralları ve Yönergeleri
Bu iletiyi bildir
You're years behind on ways to pirate games. Nowadays uncracked does not mean unpirated. Even the newest games are available day one on offline activation sites. Denuvo is completely missing the mark on piracy and it's the customers who are footing the bill, as always with DRM.
Denuvo hasn’t been transparent about how ineffective their DRM has been for quite a while now. They're panicking and it shows in how they're multiplying the misguided attempts at fixing their image these days. Denuvo usage has been going down significantly from last year and even EA, of all companies, did not use it for their new Dragon Age game.
Also, love the account with 50 games telling people with hundreds or thousand of games to "buy their games" as if the issues with Denuvo did not affect paying customers. They always crack me up.
Just because you waste most of your life playing video games doesn't make your opinion on Denuvo more valid. But I wasn't even accusing you of being a pirate, only saying it's great that pirates can't play Denuvo protected games for a while (if that's how you took it). Offline activation crap requires paying at shady sites and a bunch of additional steps most people do not want do, there is a reason pirate forums and subreddits in recent years are full of people begging for new Denuvo games to be cracked. And the fact that there are people actually paying money to play gimped games now is just another indication it works. The harder it gets to pirate a game, the less people do it.
That said. I don't even care if it's in or not. But as I have experienced absolutely zero issues with Doom '16 or Eternal because of Denuvo, Bethesda is more then welcome to include it again with DA if they believe or have data that it improves sales. And I am very sure they know a lot better then you about what works on that front.
If Denuvo worked so well, why does it barely appear in 0.25% of games? With just 350 titles in a decade, it even pales in comparison to older DRM like lawsuit-ridden SecuROM, which had double the adoption. If it truly improved sales, everyone would use it—including me. Yet Denuvo’s adoption has been in steady decline for seven years. My team thrives creating entirely DRM-free games, and we’re not starving, either.
I dislike when my games are pirated, but I’m not naïve enough to pay for the privilege to sacrifice paying customers’ experience, reputation, and community goodwill to chase the mythical “wealthy pirate who buys because they can’t crack it.” With 15,000 new games released annually on Steam, pirates can just move on to the next title. Obsessing over non-paying users before ensuring your product is the best it can be? That’s a fool’s errand. Paying five figures monthly for a DRM of ill repute with zero evidence of improved sales? Even Gabe Newell called that backwards.
And the anecdotal reports of pirates whining on forums? They’re no more meaningful than those gloating about day-one access to cracked games. Many would rather pay shady sites for a temprorary offline activation than pay publishers full price - enough for these illegitimate websites to offer 24/7 "customer support" - not even every corporation offer that kind of service. DRM won’t change their minds—it just funnels their money elsewhere. Let that sink in.
Now, consider Steam’s annual bestsellers: 2023 had Baldur's Gate 3, 2022’s top title was Elden Ring, 2021 was Valheim, and going back further we have Hades, Slay the Spire, Rimworld, Hollow Knight, Stardew Valley, and The Witcher 3 in the years prior. No game with Denuvo has been Steam’s top-selling title in the past decade. It’s almost always DRM-free games leading the charge - with the exception of Elden Ring which only used Steam's DRM-, suggesting that consumer choice may lean towards DRM-free titles when other factors are comparable.
Denuvo has been used 45% less than in 2023 (20 as opposed to 36 games last year from January to August Source[www.pcgamingwiki.com]) despite more games released than ever
- Even EA is releasing their major title Dragon Age Veilguard without Denuvo, despite a decade without missing a single game, regardless of size, expectations of sales, or budget. (Source[www.gamesradar.com]).
Actually, this first part of the year, 6 out of 10 of Steam's new best sellers have been DRM-free games (source[imgur.com]) Yes, people do buy a lot of games, sometimes even with Denuvo, but it turns out, the purchasing habits of consumers have been changing quite a bit these past years.
The reality? Not only indie games have been overtaking AAA games, the best performing games last year tended to focus on quality, lack of microtransactions and creativity... The industry is shifting away from heavy DRM hinting at growing recognition of the anti Denuvo perspective and anyone telling otherwise is either in denial or trying to fearmonger to sell you snake oil.
As highlighted by the multiple desperate and misguided attempts at fixing their disastrous image, Denuvo is obviously panicking: They're not protecting games; They're protecting outdated industry thinking. The numbers, the trends, and the gamers have spoken—and they’ve moved on.
https://vginsights.com/insights/article/global-indie-games-market-report-2024
https://vginsights.com/assets/reports/VGI_Global_PC_Games_Market_Report_2024.pdf
As a consumer this is a perfectly fine attitude to have. It's the attitude I have.
Denuvo isn't a value proposition to you so long as it gets completely out of your way and stays there. The second it fails to do that - it becomes an issue.
There are still plenty of "unknowables" about whether piracy does damage, and the argument over that will probably never end, simply because it's difficult to quantify without setup. It's an interesting thought exercise, but allowing it to impact your behavior is a personal choice and not necessarily a moral or obligate one.
For example take this very useful report:
Subtleties are there - take the page "Top 10 Released Games in 2023 by Units and Revenue." The top 4 by units only include 1 Denuvo title - the top 4 by revenue includes 3.
Obviously we don't know why that is - is it a reduction in piracy? Is it how the games are monitized? Is there a difference in popularity between regions that are more profitable? It could be any combination of these variables. Reports like this don't really give us much info on whether Denuvo is helping or hurting anything - just showing us the overall picture for a product. You still need to inject importance into them.
Moral? You are best making up your own mind on this subject. As I said previously - I highly doubt Denuvo will be in TDA, largely because it's an outdated solution. But if TDA includes it and this matters, make up your own mind and decide what will make you happier.
Anyways, any specific reason you felt the need to reframe the argument to only include the top 4, excluding most of the relevant data illustrated by the report? There's no reason to not use the whole set there: If you do consider the whole sample of the ten top games, DRM-free games such as Baldur's Gate 3, Sons of the Forest, Lethal Company and Cities Skylines II are in the same category in terms of sales with Baldur's Gate 3 dwarfing Hogwart's two to one in both units AND revenue. And that definitely does not address the fact I pointed out earlier that in the year after that, DRM-free games outnumbers games with Denuvo two to one for completely new games, showing a consistent shift in consumer habits towards DRM free games from 2023 to 2024. (source[imgur.com])
There's no apparent advantage in sales for using Denuvo as opposed to a DRM-free game. And no, if anything the fact that there's way more Indie games getting released than AAA games every year only furthers the point since those indies had to pierce an even more overpopulated and oversaturated market than AAA games to even get visible.
The reason for that is simple enough: as established by the report, games with intrinsic qualities, widely available, affordable and no controversial business practices tend to outsell games using dubious means to coax a purchase out of their customers and Denuvo clearly qualifies as such.
This rings especially true as the company selling that solution seem to make a point of digging their own grave with a distinct lack of discretion so uncharacteristic to actual cybersecurity companies. They can't help themselves but saturate gaming news with noise, whether due to controversies or misguided attempts at PR damage control - a confounding strategy that has proven counterproductive for them in the long run as the average customer has never been as aware of what DRM is and how it affects them as in the present day. This fact is supported for instance by the Anti-Denuvo curator being currently 30th global in terms of popularity, after moving up several orders of magnitude in 2023-2024 - a trend that has been quickly accelerating with 20 to 60 more followers on average every day - roughly 2% growth every week.
The evidence is clear: Denuvo's hypothetical positive impact on sales is negligible, and consumer habits are moving away from DRM-heavy games.
https://store.steampowered.com/curator/26095454/
https://vginsights.com/insights/article/global-indie-games-market-report-2024
https://vginsights.com/assets/reports/VGI_Global_PC_Games_Market_Report_2024.pdf
Denuvo might stop people from pirate the games, but the cost is that it compromises paid customers's reliable, unrestricted access to their games, free from factors that are outside of their control.
Pirates might benefit from the games having no Denuvo, but so do the legit paid customers which are more important.
So looking at Denuvo in the consumers perspective, it does not make any sense, especially when there's no proof that it actually improves sales numbers, regardless of selling window.
Since companies can really make very poopy decisions and sit on them for years, there's even less reason to believe so, the "if not helping why keep using" doesn't really have any legs, and there's an extremely high chance they don't know what they doing.
Denuvo doesn't just bother pirates; it actively harms legitimate players’ experiences, reducing it to a “pirate problem” is both naive and dismissive.
2. Maybe , just maybe, because some people, all thanks to them wasting their time with games, acknowledge what harms can DRMs like Denuvo cause, and having unrestricted, unlimited, unconditional access to the games they paid for is a priority "must have"? In this case their opinions are valid. Regardless of how many games you paid for.
3. You say you support Bethesda using Denuvo, but then claim you don't care about it. Doesn’t that seem a little inconsistent? It makes you sound disingenuous.
My mistake, I thought Starfield included Denuvo - it did not. In fact I now recall Starfield receiving a positive response because Bethesda was not shipping it with Denuvo.
There's a few comments in your narrative that are a bit strange, like "there are more indie games being released than AAA games" (kinda obvious that lower budget games would outnumber massive, expensive projects).
I'm also pretty curious about those rankings in that report, considering there's a few titles missing that I expected to see - namely DIablo 4 which according to press had record sales for the franchise, which already had put up big numbers with past entries in the series. Perhaps these were just that much bigger?
The inclusion of Overwatch 2 on the "units" side is also interesting, considering it is a free to play game and is entirely MTX driven for revenue, and it inherited it's entire playerbase when it transitioned from Overwatch 1 - a 7 year old game.
The "reason" I feel it's important to point out things like this is because these reports - in my experience - have often cherry-picked data to make a point. In this case, I don't think the point really needs to be made - the case for Denuvo is largely over for most products. I don't necessarily disagree with this report, but it is banking on generalized data which doesn't account for a lot of the variables we're talking about here, piracy included.
On this we agree - Consumer habits are moving towards SaS based, F2P or F2S games, making Denuvo a niche, outdated model.[twinfinite.net] Logging in to a server to play is normalizing, and it's doing so at a faster rate than I expected. And this is spreading to SP games too.
Any particular reason why you think clearly stating your indifferent as Zap did is "disingenuous?"
Regarding consumer habits, the claim that always-online requirements and login are “normalizing” isn’t supported by current data. Sony’s reports show that from 2020 onward there has been more players playing offline than online, suggesting that more and more players value and prefer non-restrictive gaming experiences. Obviously, Sony now trying to force account requirements on their games is their way of curbing that trend which is thwarting their plans for an always-connected gaming platform - they wouldn't need to force their players' hand if logins were normalizing.
Backlash against games like Redfall further demonstrates resistance to mandatory online requirements, even for single-player titles further evidenced by the fact the top 10 new best seller titles on Steam in the first half of 2024 do not feature a single game requiring an account to play, in line with 2023's numbers which only featured 2: Overwatch and the Finals.
https://imgur.com/a/G8TBdSs
https://vginsights.com/assets/reports/VGI_Global_PC_Games_Market_Report_2024.pdf
Finally, the report’s focus on the Steam market makes comparisons to games with minimal or nonexistent presence on the platform—like Diablo IV—entirely irrelevant. Such examples fall outside the scope of the discussion and don’t contribute meaningfully to evaluating the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of Denuvo compared to DRM-free games.
So the conversation changes if we're discussing another platform somehow? Seems like the report is leaving significantly data out and presenting only part of the puzzle.
Because when you move away from that its pretty clear that SaS based games are a massive part of the industry that are effectively dwarfing what we're talking about.
Maybe there is an entrenched playership with "legacy titles," but they're accepting SaS models by the millions and the DRM free titles being offered aren't pulling them away. And its a part of the industry dwarfing whats in that report. Maybe a different audience or just an irrelevant variable?
_______
The backlash against Sony is pretty easy to understand, but it's just one example of someone attempting to put the cat back in the bag. And they're a global, highly visible studio with a marketing machine behind their products. Their behavior may be unsavory but it's in-line with their history.
Not that scope entirely matters - smaller games can be very successful at a given targeted scale, but they have a different path to market and have different considerations once they get there. For them, DRM or SaS make a lot less sense.
Smaller indie titles are jockeying for attention and awareness in a sea of titles. Getting noticed is the whole battle most of the time. Sony doesn't have that problem. They will do nonsense like that and likely succeed anyways.
Piracy and unauthorized access mean different things to these two parties. For one, it's perceived as a loss, for the other its word-of-mouth; an unauthorized variant of 90's "shareware."
Denuvo isnt the bridge the bridge between these two realities, but it perhaps makes less sense in one than the other.
This pattern of derailing the conversation and shifting toward unrelated claims—while ignoring the specific focus on Denuvo and DRM-heavy games—is exhausting. I’ve presented evidence and engaged in good faith, but this back-and-forth isn’t productive. This will be the last time I engage with this, and I’ll be blocking both your accounts - most likely permanently this time.
Repeatedly creating alternate accounts to bypass bans and avoid accountability only undermines meaningful discussions. Hoping for your sake that you'll learn to respect people’s boundaries instead of circumventing them, or you’ll soon find yourself left to discuss these topics alone.
I am simply pointing out issues I have with your argument, which I'm sure you have done regarding mine. If you think the things I bring up are unrelated and that frustrates you, so be it.
I'll continue being neutral on this and continue posting my skepticism regarding parts of your position, and I'll continue posting flaws in the argument as I see it, when we cross paths. We will cross paths on this board.
Also - for what it's worth and since you brought it up - this is my main account. I don't create alt accounts "repeatedly" (just have one) to "bypass accountability" (look at the name of my alt, seriously).
If it's a problem - report me. Steam has widespread moderation issues and does a poor job of it - which I would argue was part of the reason I was banned in the first place.
im gonna say it like it is, be glad youre discussing this with Grampire. would you really rather talk about this with JP or SuperFly?