Steve Huin, chief operating officer of videogames, said, “there is no perceptible impact on gameplay because of the way we do things.”
What about independent testing to prove it shouldn’t have problems with expiring licenses that require online access to renew when you are trying to play offline.
Or activation limits people can encounter when trying out different proton versions on Linux to see what performs best.
And if you believe a word of that, I’ve got a bridge to sell you (in the general sense)
We already have legit comparisons done by real people of the games from this year. Hogwarts Legacy for example has its frames nearly doubled without Denuvo. You can’t place a security program inside someone’s kernel, have it fuck every file, and then claim its not you.
People always make these claims but never provide any real proof. It’s always some game of telephone where “my buddy saw some Twitter post referencing a YouTube video where Denuvo eats babies”.
I’m not even claiming that it’s a made up problem, but it’s always the same vague references.
The benchmarks are proof. If they weren’t, why would Denuvo want to provide their own doctored benchmarks to muddle the data?
“Our kernel-level malware that adds enormous overhead by scanning every single process running on your machine in no way impacts its performance”.
“But we ran benchmarks and they clearly show that it does.”
“Then we’ll make our own benchmarks, with blackjack and hookers!”
Irdeto is working on a program that would provide two nearly identical versions of a game to trusted media outlets: one with Denuvo protection and one without. After that program rolls out, hopefully sometime in the next few months, Huin hopes independent benchmarks will allow the tech press to “see for yourself that the performance is comparable, identical… and that would provide something that would hopefully be trusted by the community.”
Doubt. I don’t expect they’re going to release two copies that differ only in Denuvo presence: they’re going to release one copy that has Denuvo, and another with intentional performance degradation that matches Denuvo’s raping of your computer. Then they’ll claim, “see? no difference! we’re fine!” Meanwhile, the Denuvoless crack copy will perform 200% better, “somehow.”
Either that or they’ll do the VW thing. Denuvo disables all of its performance penalties when it detects the benchmarking suite.
This is my suspicion. Carefully create the game to run the same or better with DRM
Except that time where legitmate customers were unable to play their games because of server issues with DRM.
Or the fact that it hampers official ports of games to Linux. But aside from that, there’s no impact /s
Denuvo doesn’t hurt piracy. It hurts legitimate paying customers.
Denuvo doesn’t hurt piracy. It hurts legitimate paying customers.
Like all DRM, really. Meanwhile, Good Old Games is doing just fine without any DRM to speak of, proving that it’s of no benefit to anyone.
