[billmcneale]

> it's an anti-user feature by definition.

That's an extremely naive take that shows some stark ignorance of the tech and market forces at work.

From a tech standpoint, Denuvo negatively impacting performance has been debunked many times over (see my previous post about that).

On the economical side, you need to realize that whenever you are playing and enjoying a game, it's most likely due to the fact that the previous games sold by that developer have been successful in making money, which was most likely made possible by Denuvo.

In other words, making piracy harder allows the next generation of games to be created.

[kruczek]

> On the economical side, you need to realize that whenever you are playing and enjoying a game, it's most likely due to the fact that the previous games sold by that developer have been successful in making money, which was most likely made possible by Denuvo. > > In other words, making piracy harder allows the next generation of games to be created.

That's an extremely bold claim. There are many games which are successful and don't use Denuvo. In fact I'm quite sure there are more successful games that don't use Denuvo, then those which use it - so I don't believe that "whenever [I'm] playing and enjoying a game" it was "most likely" created thanks to Denuvo.

And then there are people like me who simply refuse to play any game which uses Denuvo. There are thousands of excellent games out there, why should I waste time on those which treat me as a thief?

[billmcneale]

> I don't believe that "whenever [I'm] playing and enjoying a game" it was "most likely" created thanks to Denuvo

I never made that claim, please reread what I wrote, but here is my point again.

When you play a game from a publisher, they were able to create it because their previous games sold well. Therefore, anything that allows games to sell well is a positive for the entire gaming community, creators and players.

Denuvo is an important part of this picture, but it's obviously not the only one.

> And then there are people like me who simply refuse to play any game which uses Denuvo. There are thousands of excellent games out there, why should I waste time on those which treat me as a thief?

That's great, and I do that as well. And this is one of the reasons why Denuvo is not anti-user: everyone has the choice to not support it.

[shmerl]

It's the truth standpoint. DRM is an overreaching preemptive policing, i.e. by its mere definition it's always aimed against the user, therefore it's always an anti-feature.

Things like fourth amendment exist for a simple reason that overreaching policing skews into being abusive. Police could always argue abusive policing "helps prevent crime" same as copyright maximalists could argue DRM "helps prevent piracy". But both would be invalid due to overreaching nature or such policing.

To put this concept into perspective. DRM runs on your personal device, in your personal digital space, for the benefit of someone who tries to police you, treating you as an a priory criminal. So conceptually it's not any better than what fourth amendment is aimed to prevent.

Excusing such concepts with "market forces" is simply cringe.

[billmcneale]

> by its mere definition it's always aimed against the user, therefore it's always an anti-feature.

Describing it as "anti user" is theoretically correct but practically incorrect. It's true that it might prevent mods and possible future uses if the servers go down, but in practice, users don't care, as is demonstrated by the fact that games that contain Denuvo routinely sell in the millions and users have no idea it's even there, and they will never know.

Overreaching?

I don't know. Companies put out a product, you're free not to buy it if you don't like it. That's one of the reasons why I call this natural market forces.

> So conceptually it's not any better than what fourth amendment is aimed to prevent.

That's a gross exaggeration. The Fourth amendment is about unreasonable searches by the government, I completely fail to see how willingly buying a digital product from non governmental organizations is connected to Fourth amendment in any rational way.

Again, at the end of the day, nobody forces you to buy that product, hence "natural market forces".

The fact that millions of these games are being bought every month tells me users don't feel that whatever flaws, perceived or real, Denuvo has matters less to them than playing these games.

[LightHugger]

Not only has not not been debunked, it's been proven to be true. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKsesO3bdv4

I don't understand why there are people always defending denuvo every time it comes up. Are you associated with denuvo directly or indirectly? Are you an ordinary gamer but for some reason post falsities to try to look superior?