Denuvo has been cracked

[Something Amyss]

Ironic because in pirated copies, the player's development business would inevitably go out of business due to rampant piracy rates.

Which still doesn't preclude the latter bit. Which was kind of my point.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

I'm not going to buy a game with Denuvo on it anyway.

It could be worse, it could be a game with Menudo on it.

 

[Vigormortis]

It's why Steams DRM is more or less the best case scenario.. A simple database check every couple months. Takes 2 seconds and that's that.

You can leave a Steam client in offline mode indefinitely, provided you don't have to reinstall.

The whole "once every two weeks" thing was just a bug that cropped up a bit over a year ago. Valve patched it within a month, I believe.

 

[Vigormortis]

I count Steam as DRM. A lot of games won't let you play unless you load up Steam first. Even it's (laughably) "offline" mode first requires you to sign in. A few years back, Sony had a neat idea for DRM that they used, it was a rootkit virus. That worked out well.

Not anymore, though. In fact, that hasn't been true for about a year now.

Valve patched in an entirely new Offline Mode and replaced the old system for storing local client data. Now you can boot Steam into Offline Mode without having to go online first. You can even keep it in Offline Mode indefinitely, if you so choose.

 

[Vendor-Lazarus]

I count Steam as DRM. A lot of games won't let you play unless you load up Steam first. Even it's (laughably) "offline" mode first requires you to sign in. A few years back, Sony had a neat idea for DRM that they used, it was a rootkit virus. That worked out well.

Not anymore, though. In fact, that hasn't been true for almost two years now.

Valve patched in an entirely new Offline Mode and replaced the old system for storing local client data. Now you can boot Steam into Offline Mode without having to go online first. You can even keep it in Offline Mode indefinitely, if you so choose.

Is this really true? really?

I've been a stanch opponent of Steam on the sole basis of it requiring you to activate games online and phone home every once in a while.
If what you are saying is true, then they should really advertise that more.
It had a very rocky start and it's continued fame and defenders only made me double down on it's inherent badness.

So lets get the straight version out.
You buy a game that comes with Steam. You install Steam & game.
You can configure Steam to launch offline and never go online unless you want to.
It's essentially a glorified sales platform with community features there if you want them.

That is, barring the game itself having a form of online activation DRM or other.

Is that correct?

 

[Something Amyss]

I'm not going to buy a game with Denuvo on it anyway.

It could be worse, it could be a game with Menudo on it.

Then I'd destroy my own hard drive.

 

[Las7]

DRM is a practice of futility by big publishers trying to show their investors they are trying to combat piracy. It's also a nice way to blame weak sales on perceived loses by people who were unlikely to ever buy the game. In this day and age where Large Publishers continue releasing unfinished or buggy games at launch, piracy is the least of their problems.
Also a lot of games nowadays are sold on hype alone, hence very much front loaded sales especially for franchise which are released on an annual basis.

The industry is putting nails in their own coffin, with DRM, broken games on launch which are not optimize for PC and require tons of mod work to become workable, DLC's for content which should have been in the game to begin with.

The only way to battle Piracy is through Steam type sales, pirates will continue pirating games but there are certainly people out there who would likely buy a game provided it reaches a value which they deem acceptable for their standards. The last game I paid full price on PC is the Witcher 3 which I preordered because I liked the way it was supported post launch for no additional cost.
Out of all the multiplats that have been released in the last year I have not played a single one because they don't cater to my sensibilities. I was contemplating DA:I but I don't like Orgin since all my games are on Steam or via GOG, another DRM on my computer to leech of my resources is not something I'm really wanting to get myself into.


I understand why Publishers like EA/Ubisoft don't want their games on Steam since it cuts into their profits but the practice of requiring people actually interested in their games to actually install another DRM platform is just plain silly, the whole DRM build into their store front is just idiotic - it works for Steam because of all the other things Steam provides like tons of games/social functions/f2p games with huge communities/steam sales/mods within the store etc

 

[Kathinka]

I count Steam as DRM. A lot of games won't let you play unless you load up Steam first. Even it's (laughably) "offline" mode first requires you to sign in. A few years back, Sony had a neat idea for DRM that they used, it was a rootkit virus. That worked out well.

Not anymore, though. In fact, that hasn't been true for almost two years now.

Valve patched in an entirely new Offline Mode and replaced the old system for storing local client data. Now you can boot Steam into Offline Mode without having to go online first. You can even keep it in Offline Mode indefinitely, if you so choose.

Is this really true? really?

I've been a stanch opponent of Steam on the sole basis of it requiring you to activate games online and phone home every once in a while.
If what you are saying is true, then they should really advertise that more.
It had a very rocky start and it's continued fame and defenders only made me double down on it's inherent badness.

So lets get the straight version out.
You buy a game that comes with Steam. You install Steam & game.
You can configure Steam to launch offline and never go online unless you want to.
It's essentially a glorified sales platform with community features there if you want them.

That is, barring the game itself having a form of online activation DRM or other.

Is that correct?

Pretty close, with the one addition that a game you install has to be activated online on steam at least once before you play it. After that, you can play in offline mode. So, still DRM, intended to prevent the piracy, and most importantly the resale of games. but not the worst DRM in the world anymore.

Of course, it's pretty common practice to make a new account for a game you know you won't keep, and then just sell the entire account access data.

 

[Vendor-Lazarus]

Snip

Ah, so it still has to be activated online. That's too bad.
If that is the case I will keep my policy of not buying anything with Steam.

It may not be THE worst DRM (Always Online and worse) but it still contains the possibility of not being able to install your game later, when those servers are down.
Which in my mind makes it a rental and so unacceptable to me.

Thanks for the clarification on how Steam works.

 

[Augustine]

DRM making has exactly the same problems as building defensive walls -
they are static, no matter how high and imposing they are, a determined enemy will overcome them, given enough time.

For the few titles that got released in the interim before it's introduction and eventual toppling may have benefited from it.
But if I were in among the members in one of the publishers' boardrooms I would want to calculate this:
Does the net gain received from people who bought the game because it was uncracked at the time outweigh the cost of purchasing the DRM and having it integrated into the product?
I am genuinely curious.

 

[Alex Baas]

I count Steam as DRM. A lot of games won't let you play unless you load up Steam first. Even it's (laughably) "offline" mode first requires you to sign in. A few years back, Sony had a neat idea for DRM that they used, it was a rootkit virus. That worked out well.

Not anymore, though. In fact, that hasn't been true for almost two years now.

Valve patched in an entirely new Offline Mode and replaced the old system for storing local client data. Now you can boot Steam into Offline Mode without having to go online first. You can even keep it in Offline Mode indefinitely, if you so choose.

Is this really true? really?

I've been a stanch opponent of Steam on the sole basis of it requiring you to activate games online and phone home every once in a while.
If what you are saying is true, then they should really advertise that more.
It had a very rocky start and it's continued fame and defenders only made me double down on it's inherent badness.

So lets get the straight version out.
You buy a game that comes with Steam. You install Steam & game.
You can configure Steam to launch offline and never go online unless you want to.
It's essentially a glorified sales platform with community features there if you want them.

That is, barring the game itself having a form of online activation DRM or other.

Is that correct?

I can confirm that you can stay in offline mode for as long as you choose. I keep my laptop steam client offline 95% of the time and have had no issue. You need to log in to install, patch or register, but that is about it. You can even launch some games without even having steam booted up at all

 

[K-lusive]

Not entirely correct. Some Steam games can be played without Steam. (Remember Skyrim at launch?) It's entirely up to the developer whether Steam's DRM is used.

Skyrim did not require Steam at launch? Before Skyrim requiring Steam (at least in Europe) I would not even consider acknowledging it back in '11...

 

[Vendor-Lazarus]

Snip

Further verification that it still requires Online Activation.
Thanks for the confirmation.

 

[Vigormortis]

Is that correct?

Yep. In fact, you'll find it hard to locate many articles or forum posts about issues with Steam's Offline Mode dated any time after 2013.

You would, of course, need to log-in into the online service and download the files, but once the game is on your system, and the game and Steam client are synced and up to date, you can either switch to or launch in offline mode and play to your hearts content.

And, barring any superfluous, extraneous DRM or any unexpected hiccups (like the game's .exe somehow desyncing with the Steam client), you should be able to leave it in offline mode.

Some games on Steam don't even require the Steam client to be open when you launch the game.

Hope that helps.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/11/05/valve-fixing-steam-offline-to-run-indefinitely/

http://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/1/864969953572102601/#c864969953730401285

Ah, so it still has to be activated online. That's too bad.
If that is the case I will keep my policy of not buying anything with Steam.

It may not be THE worst DRM (Always Online and worse) but it still contains the possibility of not being able to install your game later, when those servers are down.
Which in my mind makes it a rental and so unacceptable to me.

Thanks for the clarification on how Steam works.

If I may, even though this post wasn't directed at me, I'd like to address this.

Buying a game on Steam comes with the same responsibilities as buying a game in a store. When you purchase the files, the responsibility falls on you to keep them. Just as a 'brick-and-mortar' store is not responsible for replacing your damaged disks, should they not have any replacement stock, Steam is not responsible for providing your purchased files should Steam no longer have access to those files.

However, this is easily remedied by applying the same level of responsibility one takes in caring for their physical disks. When someone buys a game from Steam, all they need do is download the files and use the in-client Backup feature to store a backup of the game to either another hard-drive or some other physical media like a disk. That way, even if you can no longer connect to Steam, you can still reinstall and play your game.

I know that's not the lazy solution, but it's one I wish more people would consider. It's what I do with every game I purchase on Steam. I have two external hard-drives full of Steam game backups, as well as numerous DVDs.

And to be frank, I feel that not doing so is woefully irresponsible. It's like buying a disk from Gamestop and asking the store to keep the disk for you until some unknown future date when you may return to pick it up. While they may be willing to keep the disk, responsibility for the loss of the disk, should the store close down and move, falls on the disk purchaser. The same basic principle applies to Steam.

I hope that didn't come off as too confrontational. It's just that I've heard this argument often and have never quite understood it.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Piracy =/= lost sale.

I see this posted a lot, and it's true that there is not a 1:1 relationship between pirated copies of X, and lost sales of X. However, "pro piracy" or at the very least "rabidly anti-DRM" advocates have taken it to mean there is a 1:0 relationship between piracy and lost sales, and that is a hilarious mountain of bullshit.

Plenty of people who pirate would've bought otherwise. There's absolutely no way to ascertain exactly how many, but "plenty" seems an appropriately rough estimate.

You can argue whether or not the correct reaction to piracy is "more draconian DRM" or "more consumer friendly policies", that's a good argument. But don't argue that piracy isn't a money loser for the various industries that get pirated. That's ridiculously off base.

 

[Kathinka]

Snip

Ah, so it still has to be activated online. That's too bad.
If that is the case I will keep my policy of not buying anything with Steam.

It may not be THE worst DRM (Always Online and worse) but it still contains the possibility of not being able to install your game later, when those servers are down.
Which in my mind makes it a rental and so unacceptable to me.

Thanks for the clarification on how Steam works.

What I find far worse is that they can (and do) remove games from your library for completely arbitrary or thinly veiled bullshit reasons and you can't do jackshit against it. The games YOU bought with YOUR hard earned money. And then they wonder why some people pirate.

 

[Las7]

I see this posted a lot, and it's true that there is not a 1:1 relationship between pirated copies of X, and lost sales of X. However, "pro piracy" or at the very least "rabidly anti-DRM" advocates have taken it to mean there is a 1:0 relationship between piracy and lost sales, and that is a hilarious mountain of bullshit.

Plenty of people who pirate would've bought otherwise. There's absolutely no way to ascertain exactly how many, but "plenty" seems an appropriately rough estimate.

You can argue whether or not the correct reaction to piracy is "more draconian DRM" or "more consumer friendly policies", that's a good argument. But don't argue that piracy isn't a money loser for the various industries that get pirated. That's ridiculously off base.

Lets flip your argument

What about sales which were made because someone liked a game so much after pirating it that they bought a legit copy.
Or positive PR if your game is good and a lot of people have an opportunity to play it.
Or kids/teens being able to play your game because of pirating and later on growing into Adults with a hobby on which they are happy to spend money on.

Fact of the matter is companies only look at Piracy one way, and usually it's companies that have a tendancy to put out broken games who have the worst policies against pirating. Because they actually sell via hype and have a front loaded business model which will end up biting them in the butt long term.

 

[Vendor-Lazarus]

Is that correct?

Yep. In fact, you'll find it hard to locate many articles or forum posts about issues with Steam's Offline Mode dated any time after 2013.

You would, of course, need to log-in into the online service and download the files, but once the game is on your system, and the game and Steam client are synced and up to date, you can either switch to or launch in offline mode and play to your hearts content.

And, barring any superfluous, extraneous DRM or any unexpected hiccups (like the game's .exe somehow desyncing with the Steam client), you should be able to leave it in offline mode.

Some games on Steam don't even require the Steam client to be open when you launch the game.

Hope that helps.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/11/05/valve-fixing-steam-offline-to-run-indefinitely/

http://steamcommunity.com/discussions/forum/1/864969953572102601/#c864969953730401285

Thanks for the further in-depth explanation and the links.
It should help clear up any misunderstandings.

Just on other thing if you know.
If I bought my game in a brick-and-mortar store, would I still need to download the game?

Ah, so it still has to be activated online. That's too bad.
If that is the case I will keep my policy of not buying anything with Steam.

It may not be THE worst DRM (Always Online and worse) but it still contains the possibility of not being able to install your game later, when those servers are down.
Which in my mind makes it a rental and so unacceptable to me.

Thanks for the clarification on how Steam works.

If I may, even though this post wasn't directed at me, I'd like to address this.

Buying a game on Steam comes with the same responsibilities as buying a game in a store. When you purchase the files, the responsibility falls on you to keep them. Just as a 'brick-and-mortar' store is not responsible for replacing your damaged disks, should they not have any replacement stock, Steam is not responsible for providing your purchased files should Steam no longer have access to those files.

However, this is easily remedied by applying the same level of responsibility one takes in caring for their physical disks. When someone buys a game from Steam, all they need do is download the files and use the in-client Backup feature to store a backup of the game to either another hard-drive or some other physical media like a disk. That way, even if you can no longer connect to Steam, you can still reinstall and play your game.

I know that's not the lazy solution, but it's one I wish more people would consider. It's what I do with every game I purchase on Steam. I have two external hard-drives full of Steam game backups, as well as numerous DVDs.

And to be frank, I feel that not doing so is woefully irresponsible. It's like buying a disk from Gamestop and asking the store to keep the disk for you until some unknown future date when you may return to pick it up. While they may be willing to keep the disk, responsibility for the loss of the disk, should the store close down and move, falls on the disk purchaser. The same basic principle applies to Steam.

I hope that didn't come off as too confrontational. It's just that I've heard this argument often and have never quite understood it.

Not confrontational at all, just unable to fathom such a perplexing mindset. ,)

When buying in a store, I am well aware that I'm buying the disk itself and only the disk (and it's contents).
That said, I do expect it work out of the disk or I will be returning it as faulty goods.
If it does work, I assume that the CD/DVD will hold for about 20 years given moderate use. A very acceptable time frame.
When that time-frame has passed (or the disk becomes too damaged) I can always resort to back-up ISO's if I'm still inclined to play it. Or buy a GOTY/Complete edition with released updates and expansions.
Nowhere in that period would the store who sold it to me attempt to alter my game without my consent, nor having them brake into my house and uninstall my game and take my CD/DVD.

It comes down to individual control really. I want control over what I've bought.
To accept even Online Activation would lose that control and transfer it to another entity.
"We" accepted handbook passwords (irritating as they were).
"We" accepted CD-Keys (The perfect solution IMO)
"We" accepted Online Activation (Grudgingly at first, until steam)
"We" Did not accept Install Limits (I hope we haven't)
"We" are beginning to accept Always Online.

I may be called paranoid, but to me this is a clear move towards more and more store/publisher control that will in the end turn it into rentals. Per hour probably.
And that thought is horrifying to me.

We can at least agree that all other form of DRM (Rootkits, starforce, etc ) is bad I hope.

 

[Vendor-Lazarus]

Apologies for the double-post.

Snip

Ah, so it still has to be activated online. That's too bad.
If that is the case I will keep my policy of not buying anything with Steam.

It may not be THE worst DRM (Always Online and worse) but it still contains the possibility of not being able to install your game later, when those servers are down.
Which in my mind makes it a rental and so unacceptable to me.

Thanks for the clarification on how Steam works.

What I find far worse is that they can (and do) remove games from your library for completely arbitrary or thinly veiled bullshit reasons and you can't do jackshit against it. The games YOU bought with YOUR hard earned money. And then they wonder why some people pirate.

Indeed, I could not agree more. Such practices are practically screaming of bad faith and are driving people away.
As I mention in my post above, it's a form of control-shift from player to publisher/platform. People will do what it takes to maintain control over what they've bought.

Or, at least they should. This is the part where I blame consumers for letting companies get away with it.
If you buy a game you support the practices with which the game is produced, published, sold and maintained.
I can proudly say that I have not bought a single game requiring Online Activation (or worse).
I wonder how many others against Online Activation can say the same..

 

[LetalisK]

Is this really true? really?

I've been a stanch opponent of Steam on the sole basis of it requiring you to activate games online and phone home every once in a while.
If what you are saying is true, then they should really advertise that more.
It had a very rocky start and it's continued fame and defenders only made me double down on it's inherent badness.

So lets get the straight version out.
You buy a game that comes with Steam. You install Steam & game.
You can configure Steam to launch offline and never go online unless you want to.
It's essentially a glorified sales platform with community features there if you want them.

That is, barring the game itself having a form of online activation DRM or other.

Is that correct?

I think this has been the case for awhile. The only difference is Valve has made it an official feature rather than just something that happens when you unplug your internet for a minute while launching Steam. Before it was made official, Steam did have that annoying bullshit where if you didn't go into Offline mode while online, then it wouldn't let you start in offline mode later when you were actually offline. However, the work around, as I quickly found out, was to physically remove your internet connection before launching the program(you could resume internet connectivity after with no issues). Steam would detect that you had no internet and would simply launch the library in offline mode. I don't know if this worked if you used wireless internet since I always use a hardline, but the work around of removing the CAT5 cord was simple if retarded. As for the pinging back to home every once in awhile, I used this for a several months straight in 2012 when I had internet, but it was so shitty that I couldn't connect to Steam online with it.