RANDOM VIDEO GAME NEWS

[Fenixp]

Well... Do you have a 768p 4:3 one?

 

Seriously tho, just try it, 1070 should handle 4k fine. Probably.

[pmp10]

The problem is not that developers want to curtail pirates, that's resonable - the problem is when pirates circumvent them easily and we customers get saddled with more and more bloatware on our games that can completly stop them from working.

But that's the whole point of Denuvo.

It's no longer that easy to circumvent.

[Fenixp]

But that's the whole point of Denuvo.

It's no longer that easy to circumvent.

Yes, and paying customers are the ones who end up suffering, while pirates just have to wait a bit longer to get the objectively superior version of the game.

[pmp10]

 

But that's the whole point of Denuvo.

It's no longer that easy to circumvent.

Yes, and paying customers are the ones who end up suffering, while pirates just have to wait a bit longer to get the objectively superior version of the game.

 

Or they may never get to play it at all.

Game cracking isn't inevitable.

[Fenixp]

Or they may never get to play it at all.

And paying customers will still get to suffer. Remember, there's still 0 evidence that piracy directly translates to a significant number of lost sales - but there's more than enough of widely documented evidence of paying customers suffering for publisher's ... Rights.

 

And yes, that game cracking isn't inevitable is what was said about Denuvo, and multiple DRM solutions before it - they all got cracked, and pirates always got the superior versions of the product. The only way to prevent this is moving significant portions of games into cloud, which incidentally is exactly where we are headed. That way, publishers will get to decide precisely when will a game see the light and when will it die. Not the future I'm looking forward to, exactly.

[pmp10]

And yes, that game cracking isn't inevitable is what was said about Denuvo, and multiple DRM solutions before it - they all got cracked, and pirates always got the superior versions of the product.

Even if the protection is bypassed the thing about hard DRM is that it tend to happen only once.

This means it locks pirates out of future patches and DLCs.

Hardly the superior product.

The only way to prevent this is moving significant portions of games into cloud, which incidentally is exactly where we are headed. That way, publishers will get to decide precisely when will a game see the light and when will it die. Not the future I'm looking forward to, exactly.

Which is exactly why a semi-effective DRM gives us our best chance to save some form of off-line functionality.

[Fenixp]

Even if the protection is bypassed the thing about hard DRM is that it tend to happen only once.

This means it locks pirates out of future patches and DLCs.

Hardly the superior product.

First of all, this is not true at all, pirated versions get regularly updated - all that does change is that player has to wait for the updates a bit longer and updates only get applied if they're relevant. Secondly, even if pirates don't get to play the DLC or don't get the newest patch, they get to play their games for as long as they can run or emulate supported systems. Generally I take a product that actually works over one with DLC, thank you very much.

 

Which is exactly why a semi-effective DRM gives us our best chance to save some form of off-line functionality.

Wrong. If a game with Denuvo goes uncracked, yet again it's the publishers alone who get to decide when does it die. Game disappears from Denuvo's or publisher's authentication server and all you're going to get is some form of this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3A7Hsf63vuc

 

It's fantastic to cheer for DRM, isn't it? Anyway, I'm out of this exchange - at the end of the day, you as a consumer get nothing out of forms of DRM such as Denuvo. Nothing at all but harmed. Developers, you know, the actual people who create the content we know and love also get nothing out of DRM. The only ones who do derive use out of it are publishers, and it's not even monetary gain as that effect has never been proven - so the only thing publishers gain is control over the product you've purchased. If that's what you want to defend, well... Be my guest.

Edited November 27, 2016 by Fenixp

[pmp10]

 

Even if the protection is bypassed the thing about hard DRM is that it tend to happen only once.

This means it locks pirates out of future patches and DLCs.

Hardly the superior product.

First of all, this is not true at all, pirated versions get regularly updated - all that does change is that player has to wait for the updates a bit longer and updates only get applied if they're relevant.

 

If that DRM was easy to crack.

The whole point of Denuvo and other upcoming DRMs is that they are difficult to bypass.

At least so far.

[mkreku]

 

What's so hard to understand about this? Denuvo is anti-tamper, meaning it checks the integrity of the files. Nothing else. You could theoretically install a Denuvo application on thousands of different computers at once because Denuvo don't give a ****.

It connects to Denuvo's servers, sends your current hardware hash and ties the game's copy to it for either an arbitrary period of time or until hardware changes, whichever comes first. This fact got mentioned multiple times throughout this very thread, that's what's so hard to understand about it not being DRM. When it connects to the internet to authenticate copy of the game, it most certainly is DRM.

 

Additionally, the entire reason for Denuvo to exist is to protect other DRM schemes from getting circumvented. It's literally an online activation that exists to protect other online activations. You're right that Denuvo will work with whatever developers decide to implement alongside with it, but when a system works as an integral part of DRM and serves no other purpose, I'm going to call it what it actually is as opposed to buying into Denuvo's PR bull****.

 

I also don't think I really need to mention how exactly is it bad that many games now need two independent online services running at all times to function. It's all good tho, thus far all major releases containing Denovo got cracked.

 

 

This is also false. Denuvo does not need to connect to anything, neither when installing the game nor when running the game.

 

I will try this again (since it really seems to be more difficult to understand than I anticipated): Denuvo is anti-tamper (means: stop reverse engineering). Nothing else. It does not "connect to Denuvo's servers", it is not "an integral part of DRM", it doesn't install drivers, impose activation limits or require an internet connection. All those aforementioned things are part of the actual DRM that the publishers decide to implement on their products, not Denuvo. Denuvo protects the code (including any eventual DRM that's baked into said code). That's it.

 

By the way: you seem hilariously sure of how Denuvo works, writing about hashes and what not. Could you link me to where you have learned all this about Denuvo?

[Bartimaeus]

I can't give you any exact links, but /r/games on reddit has definitely talked a bit about Denuvo over the past year or so...less so recently, though, I'd say. This is where I initially heard about it and got some understanding of what it did...and heard when it was finally cracked. What does it matter where one hears about it?

Edited November 28, 2016 by Bartimaeus

[Bartimaeus]

 

Denuvo is anti-tamper (means: stop reverse engineering). Nothing else. It does not "connect to Denuvo's servers", it is not "an integral part of DRM", it doesn't install drivers, impose activation limits or require an internet connection. All those aforementioned things are part of the actual DRM that the publishers decide to implement on their products, not Denuvo. Denuvo protects the code (including any eventual DRM that's baked into said code). That's it.

 

 

 

This is actually rather interesting, because while Denuvo may not do any of those things itself, it does make any such DRM schemes baked into it much harder to remove...which I think we can safely presume that games using Denuvo are likely to do just exactly that, because otherwise, what's the bloody point of having Denuvo if it's not protecting the anti-piracy measures? Anti-modding? ...Anti-modding measures would be much more heinous to me than anti-piracy measures, anyways. Hey, wait, actually: does Denuvo make it so you can't mod your games at all? Anti-tampering and all that sounds like it should include modding...if so, most anything using it is a do-not-buy regardless of any DRM stuff.

[Fenixp]

This is also false. Denuvo does not need to connect to anything, neither when installing the game nor when running the game.

 

I will try this again (since it really seems to be more difficult to understand than I anticipated): Denuvo is anti-tamper (means: stop reverse engineering). Nothing else. It does not "connect to Denuvo's servers", it is not "an integral part of DRM", it doesn't install drivers, impose activation limits or require an internet connection. All those aforementioned things are part of the actual DRM that the publishers decide to implement on their products, not Denuvo. Denuvo protects the code (including any eventual DRM that's baked into said code). That's it.

 

By the way: you seem hilariously sure of how Denuvo works, writing about hashes and what not. Could you link me to where you have learned all this about Denuvo?

While bypassing Denuvo, cracking groups kinda had to figure out how does it work. In fact, the first way Denuvo was bypassed for Doom 2016 was by 'registering' demo versions of Doom with Denuvo, essentially pretending to be other games. Now this leads to more shady parts of the internet, so no, I'm not going to post random links - they're easy enough to find, I assume you can do that yourself. Naturally, there's no official source - Denuvo wants to obfuscate the way it works as much as humanly possible. Fact of the matter is that if the encryption ran entirely locally, it would not actually be that difficult to bypass.

 

As I said tho, at the end of the day, if part of the executable exists purely to make DRM harder to crack and has no other purpose, that part of the executable is DRM. Even if there is an older/newer version of Denuvo that doesn't actually need internet connection, it hardly matters. And the official FAQ for Denuvo on Denuvo's website quite literally states:

What is the difference between DRM and Anti-Tamper?

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."

It's designed to prevent users from tampering with DRM. Also note the peculiar wording in what does it not require of its end consumers, just by the way, specifically mentioning always online. Interestingly enough, there's not been a single Denuvo game which would not require online activation. This all reminds me of Red Dwarf, really...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oB-NnVpvQ78

 

If you really want to call that banana an orange, sure, be my guest - it's just semantics anyway. If there's another layer of problems in my games which go directly against future-proofing them and we're going to call this layer "anti-tamper" instead of calling it "DRM" for all good this does, I don't want anti-tamper solutions in my games either. Or oranges for that matter.

 

Hey, wait, actually: does Denuvo make it so you can't mod your games at all? Anti-tampering and all that sounds like it should include modding...if so, most anything using it is a do-not-buy regardless of any DRM stuff.

Well... It depends. You can't modify the .exe file, naturally, but most mods don't work using .exe modifications regardless. And then it depends on which parts of the executable are actually encrypted.

Edited November 28, 2016 by Fenixp

[Malcador]

Denuvo is protecting your files. DRM is protecting the publishers rights.

Protecting the publisher's files, not mine.

[redneckdevil]

Okay I dunno if this has been posted yet, but gonna anyways. Found this mod for fallout new Vegas called the frontier.

 

https://youtu.be/5nenXX9wQRY

 

They have a newer trailer out, I just like the song a lot better in this one

[mkreku]

While bypassing Denuvo, cracking groups kinda had to figure out how does it work. In fact, the first way Denuvo was bypassed for Doom 2016 was by 'registering' demo versions of Doom with Denuvo, essentially pretending to be other games. Now this leads to more shady parts of the internet, so no, I'm not going to post random links - they're easy enough to find, I assume you can do that yourself. Naturally, there's no official source - Denuvo wants to obfuscate the way it works as much as humanly possible. Fact of the matter is that if the encryption ran entirely locally, it would not actually be that difficult to bypass.

As I said tho, at the end of the day, if part of the executable exists purely to make DRM harder to crack and has no other purpose, that part of the executable is DRM. Even if there is an older/newer version of Denuvo that doesn't actually need internet connection, it hardly matters. And the official FAQ for Denuvo on Denuvo's website quite literally states:

 

...I don't want anti-tamper solutions in my games either. Or oranges for that matter.

 

So, to sum it up: your knowledge about Denuvo comes from pirates/pirating (where I'm sure Denuvo is a real problem, unlike for legitimate users). You have no links/articles/research to back up anything you say. You're still having problems distinguishing between digital rights management and anti-tamper. Did I miss anything?

 

Oh, and to quote the new low in the discussion, "I don't want anti-tamper solutions in my games either". Do you honestly think you have ever bought a game that did not have any form of anti-tamper on it? Seriously? You think you have bought a game with the source code clearly out in the open for everyone to see? You really don't understand the concept of anti-tamper, do you? Might as well be oranges to you.

[Malcador]

So closed source is an anti tamper mechanism?

 

And you are more likely to get a decent assessment of DRM's capabilities from those trying to break it. Else the whole idea of white hats wouldn't work. Just takes work to speak to real scene folk.

[Fenixp]

So, to sum it up: your knowledge about Denuvo comes from pirates.

Yes. Considering they cracked it, they have better knowledge of Denuvo than majority of the industry, and proved trustworthy on these issues over and over in the past. Nonetheless, you're naturally correct, they're also people and as such can be wrong. I'll choose to believe them based on what I've seen tho, and what I've seen was that, to my knowledge, not a single Denuvo game worked without online activation.

 

You have no links/articles/research to back up anything you say.

Yes, out of respect to Obsidian, I am not going to be linking sites potentially leading to links to pirate Obsidian games. My respect to Obsidian happens to be greater than my need to be 'right' as it were, so if you don't want to educate yourself, be my guest - if you do, all you really need to google is "Doom 2016 Voksi", followed by "Devnuvo CPY". Anybody in this discussion can do this. That'll give you ample information to start with your research. Hell, perhaps you'll even discover something to prove my claims false, and if you do - feel free to share it, I for one am eager to learn.

 

Oh, and to quote the new low in the discussion, "I don't want anti-tamper solutions in my games either".

That's not what I said. What I actually said was:

If there's another layer of problems in my games which go directly against future-proofing them and we're going to call this layer "anti-tamper" instead of calling it "DRM" for all good this does, I don't want anti-tamper solutions in my games either.

Look mkreku, I know you won't hesitate to swoop down to obvious logical fallacies in discussing piracy and DRM, even tho I'm not entirely sure why considering I was as courteous as I could be all the way through. When it comes to anti-tampering, Denuvo is actively working with encryption and decryption on your CPU/GPU - these are expensive, hardware-specific operations which can easily break if they're not getting constantly updated for changing software and hardware. Most games just attempt to obfuscate their code as a form of anti-tamper solution, which won't actually break their compatibility, thus the fairly essential part of that sentence stating "If there's another layer of problems in my games which go directly against future-proofing them" becomes kinda important. In fact, the effect can already be seen in lack of copatibility with Linux's WINE when it comes to Denuvo-protected games.

 

And yes, I'll also call those attempts at obfuscating code mere extension of DRM as that's quite literally the only reason they exist, just as I'll call Denuvo DRM based on Denuvo themselves stating the only reason for their entire solution existing is to protect DRM - which is what started this entire discussion, isn't it?

 

Naturally, there were many attempts at coming up with alternate solutions, and all of them lead to a disaster sooner or later down the line, infamous SecuROM leading the charge (I actually liked Boiling Point when it came out back in the day, and now I have two DVDs sitting in the game's case - entirely useless original DVD with SecuROM and actually functional one I got via piracy). But yes, you're quite correct, my statement didn't apply exclusively to Denuvo, and I never pretended it does. It is as they say: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." Thankfully, my Boiling Point DVD is sitting over there as a constant reminder - perhaps you could use one yourself.

 

Anyway, I'm tired of this discussion now and considering you're falling back to the usual cycle of insults and fallacies, I won't be posting on it anymore.

Edited November 29, 2016 by Fenixp

[marelooke]

Another good example of DRM gone horribly wrong was the disc version of the first Witcher game (which I suffered through to completion). That DRM (Tages, dixit Google) would check the disc on every single loading screen and would crash or hang (don't remember) the game when it couldn't verify the data fast enough, which was quite often given the DRM's need to spin up the disc for pretty much every DRM check (since the game data was on the hard drive). Not to mention the effect on the loading times (which became horrifyingly long, up to multiple minutes sometimes to enter a small house).

 

It was so bad CDPR presumably lost money and reputation over it and became the DRM opponents they are nowadays. Anybody who thinks CDPR was "born enlightened" would do well to remember the Witcher 1 DRM fiasco and that their stance on DRM is a hard learned lesson.

[mkreku]

So closed source is an anti tamper mechanism?

 

And you are more likely to get a decent assessment of DRM's capabilities from those trying to break it. Else the whole idea of white hats wouldn't work. Just takes work to speak to real scene folk.

 

Yes. The very definition of anti tamper is closed source. You close the source to stop people from tampering with it. Seriously, why do you think not all code is open source?

 

 

 

Anti-tamper software (or tamper-resistant software) is software which makes it harder for an attacker to modify it. The measures involved can be passive such as obfuscation to make reverse engineering difficult or active tamper-detection techniques which aim to make a program malfunction or not operate at all if modified.

 

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-tamper_software

 

---

 

Developers say there's basically no performance penalty to Denuvo, no online activation and they don't destroy SSD's. Pirates say every bug is Denuvo's fault, Denuvo wrecks SSD's (which has been proven wrong over and over again) and takes a lot of performance.

 

I tend to believe developers, you tend to believe pirates. 

 

Also, I love that Doom (2016), that's considered to be one of the best optimized games ever, uses Denuvo. Imagine that, with all the performance Denuvo is stealing encrypting/decrypting everything in real time while also secretly connecting to servers!

 

Yes, out of respect to Obsidian, I am not going to be linking sites

 

I'm sure that's the reason.

 

"You commit logical fallacies! I'm courteous, you're on a cycle of insults and fallacies! I will not link my secret sources, you just have to trust me! You've made me tired, I will leave now!"

 

Trust me, I'm not going to cry myself to sleep from not having to deal with this level of discussion any further.

[Malcador]

I'd expect an anti-tamper scheme to be more active than just hoping no one reverse engineers your .exe's. Heck, by your definition, I don't think a compiler meets the critertia of "Anti-tamper software (or tamper-resistant software) is software which makes it harder for an attacker to modify it."

 

Closed source stuff is usually to just hide trade secrets (well some of them anyway) rather than worrying about people modifying your application - and if they do, it's not really your problem. I've had that with customers in old jobs - joys of DBs, I guess. I'd be surprised if developers would come out and slam their third party vendor, well, unless they are the one that made the call to use it, kind of a bad play, really. I'd be more inclined to listen to the offense in terms of figuring out what it does, bit of sifting.

Edited November 30, 2016 by Malcador

[sorophx]

Yes. The very definition of anti tamper is closed source. You close the source to stop people from tampering with it. Seriously, why do you think not all code is open source?

you make it sound as if all games that didn't use Denuve were open source. I have a feeling Denuvo doesn't just protect games' source code

[Blarghagh]

Just FYI reminder to everyone: Posting links to pirated material here is one of the few things that can and will get you banned here. Trying to bait someone into posting such links is therefore also considered... bad form, to say the least. We also prefer it if people would tackle the ball and not the man, so to speak. A bit too many personal jabs in this thread for my liking.

[Malcador]

Just FYI reminder to everyone: Posting links to pirated material here is one of the few things that can and will get you banned here. Trying to bait someone into posting such links is therefore also considered... bad form, to say the least. We also prefer it if people would tackle the ball and not the man, so to speak. A bit too many personal jabs in this thread for my liking.

Oh yeah?

[sorophx]

I was expecting someone to post this actually:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVCnkso1Ipc

[Agiel]

What it's like to become a YouTube gaming celebrity at 80 years old