Dragon Age Inqusition: Denuvo DRM apparently liable to destorying SSDs

[madster11]

Don't forget the performance loss, guys.
The Lords Of The Fallen devs themselves admit to a 5% performance loss, which means an actual performance loss of 10-15%.

All to prevent, what?
Do they really think this will be the first DRM system ever created to go un-cracked?
Of course it bloody well won't. Probably before 2015.

 

[RavingSturm]

Btw what utility can you use to check the number of read/write cycles over a specific interval of time?

 

[DoPo]

All to prevent, what?
Do they really think this will be the first DRM system ever created to go un-cracked?
Of course it bloody well won't. Probably before 2015.

"46 days.

That?s how long the latest Denuvo-protected EA game (FIFA 14) lasted before being cracked."

Not my words, that's on Denuvo's website [http://www.denuvo.com/#page-3] (click on the controller on that page, because, apparently, fuck usability).

 

[votemarvel]

DRM does only affect the legitimate purchasers of something. Remember those unskippable anti-piracy ads on DVDs, that the pirates never saw because they were ripped out.

Though 46 days would cover the initial launch window where most of a games money is going to be made, those who are going to pirate a game really aren't going to be bothered about having to wait a couple of months in order to play. Others will just wait until inevitable sales.

 

[RagingTiger]

So basically the honest consumer has to deal with a flurry of DRM headaches and a shortened lifespan for SSDs while pirates can play with 0 worries in any regard? I thought piracy was meant to be the least desirable option, seems our honesty comes at a price.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

Though 46 days would cover the initial launch window where most of a games money is going to be made, those who are going to pirate a game really aren't going to be bothered about having to wait a couple of months in order to play. Others will just wait until inevitable sales.

Doesn't matter.

DRM, insofar as far as copy protection goes, is more about publishers protecting themselves from shareholders and other stakeholders than actually stopping determined people from copying games. The issue is that if a publisher can be shown to have not taken "all reasonable measures" to protect their product, then people with a financial interest in either the company or the product can lawyer up and fuck them hard... and unfortunately 'reasonable' isn't judged on the perspective of gamers but on the perspective of stakeholders and their bottomline.

 

[votemarvel]

I agree with you Rhombus, I've said what you have in threads before now. Companies have to be seen to be protecting their copyright.

Piracy can also been seen as a more desirable option because it is often the easier to deal with.

Mass Effect 3 for example. I double click on the desktop icon and Origin has to start. Once that is loaded I now wait for the game to start. At the title screen I hit a button and before the menus fully load I have a DLC check. After that the menus load fully and I get another DLC check. Then I am allowed to start the game.

Have a cracked copy and I double click the desktop icon, the game loads, click a button at the main menu and I can start the game.

There's probably only a few seconds of difference but it just irritates me that the pirates don't have to put up with it at all.

Sure I can grab a cracked .exe but I shouldn't have to. I should, as a paying customer, be having an easier experience than a pirate.

 

[Lovely Mixture]

So basically the honest consumer has to deal with a flurry of DRM headaches and a shortened lifespan for SSDs while pirates can play with 0 worries in any regard? I thought piracy was meant to be the least desirable option, seems our honesty comes at a price.

At this point I'm wondering if the preferable option for PC game consumers is going to be:

1. Purchasing games legitimately to show that they are honest and are willing to pay.
2. Then downloading a crack or a cracked pirated version (of the game they just bought) so they can play it with no issues.

At this point, most of my boycotts are matters of convenience since I refuse to download another DRM platform other than Steam.

 

[ninja666]

At this point, most of my boycotts are matters of convenience since I refuse to download another DRM platform other than Steam.

That's the biggest problem. You people want the developers to stop injecting DRM systems that restrict you, while humbly agreeing to using Steam - so far the biggest restricting DRM there is. They see that and know that they can do what they want because sooner or later you're all gonna succumb to it.

 

[thewatergamer]

Explain to me EA why you need TWO forms of DRM on your games?

Isn't Origin enough for you?

*sigh* and just when I thought you were actually turning around with the "On the House Program" and "Origin Sales" it seems like EA is split into two halves, a good half, and an evil half,

Can't say I'm surprised, but I'm disappointed all the same, oh and game companies for future reference 1 form of DRM is quite enough for me thank you very much, I am going to outright refuse any game that requires me to go through Steam/Origin AND some other crap form of DRM for no reason, that's a big reason why I don't buy Ubisoft games, U-play is a second form of DRM that I don't want to use

*sigh* Well guess I'm not touching DA:I until this is removed... if ever that is...

 

[Lovely Mixture]

That's the biggest problem. You people want the developers to stop injecting DRM systems that restrict you, while humbly agreeing to using Steam.

Nice use of "you people"

Humble? No, I have plenty of issues with Valve and Steam. But I'm willing to compromise because it's only one layer of DRM that provides additional services. If I need to register an additional account for some games I can compromise that because because it's one registration.

Uplay, Origin, and whatever Blizzard uses, restrict me to games by one publisher.

- so far the biggest restricting DRM there is.

No that'd be "the game flat out won't work if it's not connected to the internet."

They see that and know that they can do what they want because sooner or later you're all gonna succumb to it.

No. Because I draw the line at places.
Is mine hypocritical? By some standards, yes.
But if the standard is " 1 digital platform + subsequent account registrations" it's not hypocritical.

So far I've held that line.

 

[ninja666]

That's the biggest problem. You people want the developers to stop injecting DRM systems that restrict you, while humbly agreeing to using Steam.

Nice use of "you people"

Humble? No, I have plenty of issues with Valve and Steam. But I'm willing to compromise because it's only one layer of DRM that provides additional services. If I need to register an additional account for some games I can compromise that because because it's one registration.

I was speaking about people in general, not specifically about you. I just used your statement as an example because it happened to be in the right place at the right time.

- so far the biggest restricting DRM there is.

No that'd be "the game flat out won't work if it's not connected to the internet."

And with Steam it's "the game flat out won't work if not ran from within the application". Sounds familiar?

 

[Lovely Mixture]

And with Steam it's "the game flat out won't work if not ran from within the application". Sounds familiar?

Offline mode, plus a handful of steam games work without the client.

 

[ninja666]

And with Steam it's "the game flat out won't work if not ran from within the application". Sounds familiar?

Offline mode, plus a handful of steam games work without the client.

"Offline mode" doesn't dismiss you from running the game from within the client. You still need to have it installed. And "a handful of games" is no counterargument because majority of them is still dependent on said client.

 

[ngl42398]

Boy am I glad I didn't buy this shitty port. Man, fuck you EA. How about not treating your customers like thieves for once.

 

[ninja666]

How about not treating your customers like thieves for once.

Maybe it's part of their plan? Maybe they insert this ridiculous DRM because want us to pirate their games, to have a legit reason to treat us like thieves in the future?

 

[Wulfram77]

This seems very likely to be inaccurate. No one else has reproduced the issue.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

This seems very likely to be inaccurate. No one else has reproduced the issue.

It's entirely inaccurate, and it's both amusing and depressing to see a thread full of people flipping out over an unsubstantiated rumor from a random RPG board when the lack of supporting evidence was already pointed out to them. Especially since a great many people on this forum self-identify as pillars of rationality interested only in immutable facts.

 

[Michael ZekerWeten]

Soooo Denuvo is lying?

A copy paste from their FAQ:

Q: Does Denuvo Anti-Tamper constantly encrypt and decrypt data on storage media?
A: No, Denuvo Anti-Tamper does not continuously encrypt and decrypt any data on storage media. To do so would be of no benefit in terms of security or performance.

Q: Does Denuvo Anti-Tamper affect my SSD or any other type of hard drives in any way?
A: No. As mentioned before, Denuvo Anti-Tamper does not constantly read or write any data to storage media.

Q: What is the difference between DRM and Anti-Tamper?
A: A Digital Rights Management (DRM) system binds the game to a legitimate user account and allows the game to be played whenever and wherever the consumer wants to download and execute the game.
Anti-Tamper stops the reverse engineering and debugging of the DRM solution, but has no effect or limitation on the legitimate consumer. Anti-Tamper is completely transparent to legitimate game buyers and does not in any way impose activation limits, install drivers, or require a gamer to be "always on."

 

[Denamic]

At this point, most of my boycotts are matters of convenience since I refuse to download another DRM platform other than Steam.

That's the biggest problem. You people want the developers to stop injecting DRM systems that restrict you, while humbly agreeing to using Steam - so far the biggest restricting DRM there is.

That's funny, because I've never felt restricted because of steam. In fact, it's steam that let me log into my account and download games from wherever I damn well please whenever I choose to do so. It's also my primary IM program, letting me keep in touch with gamer friends. It also keeps my games up to date without me having to do anything, and it even provides me with patch notes when the developers decide to share them. There's also newsfeeds for several games to keep me up to date with events. The store gives me great discounts and it's tailored to my preferences. It also provides easy access to game tools like the construction set for skyrim, or things like dedicated server software for games that support it. There's also the workshop that lets me mod games with the click of a button, and keep those mods up to date with no input required from me. For those with the skills to do so can create item models for dota and earn money doing it. It even lets me sell items I get from playing games. I can actually buy games with money I earned as a byproduct from playing games. There's even a goddamn music player built in now. How the hell is this the most restrictive DRM there is?