all 6 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 15 points 3 months ago

I mean, their former company was the one that formed GOG. And the Witcher games didn't have any DRM either. I would have been surprised if they used any DRM.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago

    Cool, I'll have to check it out.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (3 children)

    Well Denuvo bypasses are usually released within a few hours of a games release and full cracks usually follow a few days to a week later. Denuvo protection is not what it used to be.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    So it is a good publicity stunt on their part.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    Not exactly. Almost nobody uses Denuvo Hypervisor Bypass, because of security concerns, and because for now it's only available on Windows. Although apparently a version for Linux is in development.

    Denuvo still usually guarantees a few months of no cracks for a game, which is plenty for publishers. They mostly care about that early period, which is where 99% of marketing goes into. Which is why you can see many games losing Denuvo a while after launch.

    Whether or not it actually offers any monetary benefit is an entirely different matter. Most or all reliable research on the topic suggests that video game piracy almost always has a positive impact on sales. After all, legally purchasing [a license to] a game usually offers a more pleasant experience, with playtime tracking, achievements, screenshot sharing etc.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • 1 comment in c/indiegamedev@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 4 points 3 months ago

    I've heard that lie before.

  • source