Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Hitman 2's Denuvo DRM Cracked Days Before the Game's Release (arstechnica.com)

Posted by msmash on from the awkward dept.

thegarbz writes: Denuvo, the darling of the DRM industry was once considered by publishers to be the final solution to piracy. Slashdot has documented the slow decline of Denuvo from stories in 2014, and 2016 where publishers were praising Denuvo's success at mitigating piracy for weeks, to its slow decline last year where games were being cracked within "hours" of release. The popular wisdom of publishers in the past considered DRM worth while as it thwarts piracy during the critical sales spike when games are first released. Last week saw Hitman 2, the latest Denuvo protected game get cracked in a short time. The kicker, the game isn't officially released until this Thursday.

Publishers are now eroding the potential sale day advantage of DRM through the latest practice of offering games for early release in an attempt to secure an ever larger number of pre-orders for popular titles. This leads to the obvious question: Does DRM make financial sense to include in titles if they risk being cracked before release date? Conversely, does releasing games early to selected customers make financial sense if it results in the DRM being cracked before release?

111 comments

  1. Trial release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They should do what games did before. The pre-release is only a small subset of the game. That way there is no sense trying to "crack" the game because it isn't the full one anyway.

  2. Re:Fuck c6gunner (who is also ZIP)... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah we need to have a good purge of the nazi trollbots on this site, impersonating you and Beau and everyone else. Don't they have lives of their own? c6gummer is just nazi trash, find and execute.

  3. Does it still slow games to a crawl at random? by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

    I seem to remember several folks tracing performance problems in Batman Arkham Knight to Denuvo, but I could be wrong. I know they swear it doesn't impact performance but I find that tough to believe given how it works (it encrypts the entire game and decrypts it on the fly).

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Does it still slow games to a crawl at random? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The encryption is the resource intensive process. The decryption is trivial, given that you have the proper decryption key.

    2. Re:Does it still slow games to a crawl at random? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I've seen tests that show that some types of DRM do impact the performance of games, Denuvo being one of them. I've seen results from a 5 to 10 frame drop, or larger. That is not trivial. DRM is not stopping piracy. As it is now, the pirates are getting the superior product. Games that are DRM free will always get more money from me than games with horrible DRM.

    3. Re:Does it still slow games to a crawl at random? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You remember correctly.
      Legit paid customers of that game had a worse experience than the pirates.

      Pirate copy didn't stutter at all in those scenes.

      Many customers actually installed the pirate versions to get around it.
      Makes you wonder why they paid at all...

  4. where are the editors? by negrace · · Score: 0

    It is not "hours", it is hours.

    1. Re:where are the editors? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is not "hours", it is hours.

      Concur. They can't even blame copy/paste from TFA; somebody added them just for Slashdot's TFS.

  5. It's all bullshit... by blahplusplus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ... the reason Denuvo is even possible is because the internet fundamentally alterated the relationship between PC game buyer and PC game seller. Developers and publishers have all the power now since customers are 100's of miles away and can't simply storm their offices and force the drm and evil server locks out of their AAA games. High speed internet was the biggest cheat code ever granted to game companies by the laws of our universe. Once they make a game they can just keep it on their servers while giving you only half the game you paid for, while giving you the big shit sandwitch.

    The tech industries (and hence game industry) eternal quest was to get rid of software ownership and to take control of the customers PC/software to exploit them for profits. They've been doing a remarkable job and this all began with Ultima RPG's on the PC back in the 90's, they rebadged RPG's as mmo's to get a gullible gaming public to pay monthly for the same fucking game because they know the public is stupid and illiterate as fuck.

    Denuvo, mmo's and steam could only exist in a world where the average person is bumfuck retard level stupid in the head. All the cool things we used to get in the 90's like QeRadiant for quake and level editors have been dialed back completely because, the worlds technology illiterate got locked down smart phones and high speed internet.

    That enabled companis to put gambling interfaces into software and reach the 3% of the population that is, the super rich, the super dumb and super impulsive. Let's remember League of legends model has a conversion rate of less than 3%, so that means most gamers aren't stupid enough to hand Riot money. The same thing you see on Mobile games where these mobile games have a gambing/gacha interface. THe internet allowed game companies to simply keep the software and disposess the public from owning and controlling the software so they can just exploit the 3% willy nilly and make super profits.

    Watching this all go down for 20 years was pretty alarming, I never thought the camel getting it's nose into the tend would mean the entire game industry would clean up 20 years later because of locked down smart phones gave the access to the global population with too much money and people with impulse control problems, allowing game companies to be incentivized to never give people the full software they are paying for ever again.

    1. Re:It's all bullshit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Watching this all go down for 20 years was pretty alarming,

      So what?

      If you don't like online games, don't play online games then. If you prefer the good old games you own - do like me, and play them! What is the obsession with having "new" games every year?

      Or go for open-source games where you still have level editors. (And the ability to change the game itself too, if you think it can be done better.)

    2. Re:It's all bullshit... by blahplusplus · · Score: 1

      If you don't like online games, don't play online games then. If you prefer the good old games you own - do like me, and play them! What is the obsession with having "new" games every year?

      You don't seem to understand the agenda, the agenda for the corporate world is to get rid of game ownership entirely. Quake 3 is an "online game" but you own and control it, it has dedicated server that comes with the game and tools to edit levels, Quake champions is an "online game" except the company owns and controls the software, meaning you get jack shit. They simply prevent you from controlling the software by coding it in a hostile way and hopign people are stupid enough to pay for microtransactions.

      https://www.gamesindustry.biz/...

      https://www.gamesindustry.biz/...

    3. Re:It's all bullshit... by lengel · · Score: 1

      It could also be argued that the internet changed the relationship because stealing/copying/sharing/whatever became trivial worldwide instead of exchanging physical media with your local buddies like the olden days.

      Look at both sides of the internet changing the dynamic.

    4. Re:It's all bullshit... by blahplusplus · · Score: 1

      It could also be argued that the internet changed the relationship because stealing/copying/sharing/whatever became trivial worldwide instead of exchanging physical media with your local buddies like the olden days.

      Look at both sides of the internet changing the dynamic.

      Except before high speed internet everywhere companies did not have the ability to shut off or break the game you are paying for, aka quake 3 can't be broken by a game company because it's a complete game. Where as most modern games require a server in order to function. That's where the theft/stealing comes in on behalf of game companies. Your game only exists by fiat of corporate CEO's.

    5. Re:It's all bullshit... by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      ... the reason Denuvo is even possible is because the internet fundamentally alterated the relationship between PC game buyer and PC game seller.

      The premise of your post is completely wrong and DRM well and truly predates the internet. The only difference was previous DRM schemes could be broken with a photocopier, or simply a pen.

      As to your second point, Denuvo fundamentally prevents publishers needing to do exactly what you said: Withholding assets. If withholding assets was the tactic then you wouldn't need DRM, it would be inherent in the game.

    6. Re:It's all bullshit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The premise of your post is completely wrong and DRM well and truly predates the internet. .

      No sorry, before the internet you got the complete software. Modern games are held hostage on servers half way across the world - before internet, League of legends and DOTA 2 would have been regular RTS games with a multiplayer component, in a world of high speed internet they are multiplayer games totally owned and controlled by companies who fleece gullible kids and idiots to pay for skins in a game that is not theres.

      AKA before the internet, these games would be owned and controlled by players as regular games on console/PC (if in doubt for those reading starcraft 1 had a console port).

      So no, your premise is false. Before internet penetration was wide enough it wasn't profitable enough to steal the game and lock it down. That's the reality, game companies are literally stealing the software because gamers they can simply keep the software on their machines once it is done and give you the big fuck you as they only give you the "client" while keeping the "server", in quake 3 days you got both client and server in the same quake exe, aka it was a complete game.

    7. Re:It's all bullshit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are just doing what makes sense, given their incentives.

      They don't have some utopian philosophy that amounts to them working and everyone else benefiting. They have a direct incentive to increase their level of wealth, and they have the productive capacity to do it.

      You are free to play games that were instead written by hobbyists who give them away for free. No one is requiring you to play these games that require internet access. Hell, your social life would probably improve if you did not play these games.

    8. Re: It's all bullshit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you are wrong, fucker. Anti-copying DRM has existed for over 30 years, predating the internet. I still have many protected Apple II disks.

    9. Re:It's all bullshit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It happens by the consent of the consumer. Consumers who don't like it don't buy triple A games, simple as that.

    10. Re: It's all bullshit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DRM != Copyright protection.

      I was about to mention the same thing. I didn't have a problem with copy protection depending on how it was implement. Installations keys or codes out of manuals were fine. I could keep those safe along with my installation media. I did not like copy protection that prevented me from backing up my media, but I didn't mind having to leave a disk in the drive.

      The modern day DRM with online activation servers and games trapped on corporate servers are not good. These companies treat paying customers like they are criminals to not be trusted. Look at the recent incident with many Windows 10 computers losing their activation status because of a problem with a Microsoft server. Those that pirated a cracked version probably never experienced that problem.

      I still go back from time to time and play my old games. I have games for the Atari 2600, C-64, Amiga, and many DOS and Windows games. I can get all those old ones to work. How many games has EA killed because they stopped running the required server?

      DRM is anti-consumer.

    11. Re: It's all bullshit... by AsylumWraith · · Score: 1

      Not just EA. Take Tabula Rasa as an example. I had a large group of friends with whom I liked to play. Then NCSoft decided it wasn't profitable and shut it down. No more Tabula Rasa.

      If it was like the old days the OP was talking about, we could've set up a server, and continued on playing happily. We weren't in it for the PvP, anyway.

    12. Re:It's all bullshit... by AsylumWraith · · Score: 1

      It's the principle of the thing; exactly the same as music, movies, etc.

      If I pay for something, I expect to be able to access it in perpetuity. How is it fair to shut down a game a year after release, and leave everyone hanging?

      Now, if a game is subscription only, (as in, you don't pay an initial fee to buy a "copy" of the game,) then one could argue that's different.

      You can also argue, as you did, the wisdom of buying anything that you don't have complete control over, (games, music, movies, etc.)

    13. Re:It's all bullshit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It happens by the consent of the consumer. Consumers who don't like it don't buy triple A games, simple as that.

      There is no consent because most of the public is uninformed and you'd need to be physically close to the business to have a market in an internet enabled society. Since these policies are being forced.

  6. Re: Fuck c6gunner (who is also ZIP)... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe we good use for Al find troll and kill them with VX gas

    msmash

  7. False premise for DRM. by Ecuador · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The basic premise for the need of DRM is false. It assumes people who would buy the game the moment it comes out are the same group as the people who would pirate it. Which is quite sad, the companies basically believe their customers are pirates and they would not pay if they were given the chance. Which has been proven false in many ways. In fact, from personal experience, the people who would pay for a game would only pirate it if there is a reason, like DRM making their life difficult.
    I know I am just preaching to the choir here...

    --
    Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
    1. Re:False premise for DRM. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are a few instances where I have bought a game because I couldn't pirate it immediately.

      Normally I wait until the game is cracked or the price of the game is 80% off or so.

      This is MOST people, you are the outlier, friendo.

    2. Re:False premise for DRM. by alvinrod · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think it's even worse than that. For years, the piracy figures were so blown out of proportion that if you bothered doing the math it wasn't unusual to end up with a dollar amount that rivaled the world's GDP. If you're a CEO or manager, it's pretty easy to blame piracy for failed expectations and shareholders might go along with you on it. Of course at that point, you now need to try to do something about the piracy that you've told everyone is destroying your business, so you buy some useless DRM, but what the hell do you care since it acts as a good cover and when it inevitably fails, you can just point to that failure as another excuse.

      Eventually though, investors will realize this is just a load of shit. Just make good games and you'll get showered with money. There was just a story here about Rockstar having the largest weekend haul with their new game. Or look at companies like CD Projekt Red that are selling their games on GoG without DRM and they've grown from a small studio to a massively successful one and their newest game has a massive amount of hype behind it. Their games are easier to pirate than any other since it has no DRM on it, yet they've made massive amounts of money as well.

    3. Re:False premise for DRM. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I can't remember if I ever bought a game because I couldn't pirate it. When I was a kid I would pirate because I couldn't afford games, or just because it was fun to pirate. If I couldn't pirate it, I lived without it until I could. I still spent money on the games that I really loved though. Now that I'm older, I don't pirate at all. However, I do hate DRM. If I buy a game that is only available with DRM, I wait until the price is reduced and then goes on a big sale. I spend an average between $2.50 and $7.50 for games with DRM. I will buy DRM free games new for the ones I want the most, and my sale average is between $2.50 and $20 for DRM free.

      I despise DRM. It does not stop the majority of piracy. It only hurts the paying customer and allows the publisher to maintain a grip on your software.

       

    4. Re:False premise for DRM. by King_TJ · · Score: 1

      In all honestly, I think there's at least some crossover.... but the biggest reason the game makers don't have more piracy than they do is the trend towards multi-player games requiring server-side logins.

      It does no good to pirate a game if it doesn't include a valid login ID to do much more than play through a few tutorial missions.

      DRM is garbage, any way you look at it, though because it punishes EVERYONE who pays for the program. They've got to deal with the additional restrictions and hassles the DRM imposes as thanks for being s paying customer, supporting the game.

      I've always said that piracy is a fool's errand to try to eradicate. The people who pirate games are the SAME audience who may buy your games. The vast majority of gamers are people who don't have unlimited incomes, and they can only budget so much of what they earn for entertainment expenses. The game makers need to simply accept that piracy happens, and it's part of the industry. With so many forms of entertainment competing for a person's limited dollars to spend -- only a handful of items will make the cut as the ones a person chooses to purchase. Whether they wind up pirating hundreds of other titles, or they choose not to pirate a single one changes nothing about your profits. They purchased as much as they were willing to purchase, either way.

      In some cases, a game developer really may have bad luck and find they didn't make much at all on a game, despite 99% of the people playing it pirating it. That's unfortunate, but probably has more to do with a failure to market it successfully to people, or failure to produce something that rose above the competition released in the same time frame. It's not about "all those dirty software pirates preventing me from making a living". It's relatively easy to write something good enough that people will take out 10 minutes to download it for free and then spend some time playing it. It's much more difficult to write something SO good, it stands out in a sea of other options (including movies released on DVD, new novels that are published, and all sorts of other forms of entertainment people might choose to enjoy instead of playing your game).

    5. Re:False premise for DRM. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also a false premise for your counter-argument. There is a fairly large slice of people who, given a chance, would choose something for free over paying for it. That slice is especially large when including teens and young adults with limited budgets.

      I'm not going to claim DRM is the solution, but rather just pointing out that the often-quoted argument you bring to the table is incredibly narrow and flawed.

    6. Re:False premise for DRM. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The basic premise for the need of DRM is false. It assumes people who would buy the game the moment it comes out are the same group as the people who would pirate it.

      As another poster mentioned, I think it's used to justify lower than expected sales figures. Of course, once they start using DRM and the sales figures don't really improve substantially, I'm sure they come up with all sorts of other excuses.

      Which is quite sad, the companies basically believe their customers are pirates and they would not pay if they were given the chance.

      I'd tend to argue it's the case of the pot calling the kettle black. Plenty of companies are willing to take shortcuts, even things that amount of piracy, to make money. It's little wonder they'd turn around and thing consumers would do the same to them.

      Which has been proven false in many ways.

      And plenty of companies and consumers refuse to pirate because they don't see any point to it. I know personally that I'd rather not pirate, so when someone licenses old console/arcade games (1980/1990 era) I really want to support at least the producers even if they actual authors are long gone and the original company doesn't even exist (ie, it's all IP transfers). It's what makes it sad that some retro hardware makers then pirate emulators. I guess on the bright side they're finally pirating emulators that don't suck vs using some 3rd party hacked together piece of shit that runs at 10-110% speed.

      In fact, from personal experience, the people who would pay for a game would only pirate it if there is a reason, like DRM making their life difficult.

      The biggest deciding factor on people not pirating is people having enough disposable income that piracy isn't worth the effort. Even with pretty crap DRM schemes, plenty of people will still work harder to get a game working with DRM than looking for some sort of crack--presumably because they paid for it and want to get their money's worth. Those without money (the poor, kids, countries with much lower standards of living, etc) end up pirating a lot, playing a lot of free games, or both. The more there's successful cracking down hard on piracy alone, the more people will move to the free stuff or just keep replaying their own legal/illegal collection. The wisest thing to do is figuring out a way to get people with money to pay full price and get would-be pirates to pay a major discount price.

      I know I am just preaching to the choir here...

      The most damning thing I can say about Hitman 2 is I'm not interested in the franchise at all. I think the idea grotesque and absurd. Mass killing in GTA? At least I can vague understand the concept. Perhaps it's because most stealth-minded games just make so little sense and Hitman, which is all about killing people and hiding their dead bodies, takes it to the extreme.

    7. Re:False premise for DRM. by blahplusplus · · Score: 1

      Eventually though, investors will realize this is just a load of shit. Just make good games and you'll get showered with money.

      Not so young padawan, CEO's have discovered the ultimate "3%" via locked down games and gacha/gambling mobile games. They want to bring that to all games. Mobile is making profits that is on route to eclipse the entire PC and Console game market combined because of the locked down nature of smart phones and the fact they've put gambling interface on it for the super rich, super stupid, and super impulsive. That 3% is what game companies are now after.

      https://newzoo.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Newzoo_2017_Global_Games_Market_Per_Segment_April_2017.png

      There was just a story here about Rockstar having the largest weekend haul with their new game

      Rockstar has drm out the wazoo and who's game is fully drm'd for shark cards, which is why they were threatening hackers. They want those mtx and gambling money badly. Same with epic and fortnite. Now they are fully incentivized never to give you the game you are paying for ever again.

      https://torrentfreak.com/epic-games-sues-youtuber-golden-modz-over-magical-fortnite-powers-181012/

    8. Re:False premise for DRM. by _Shorty-dammit · · Score: 1

      Yup, DRM never has and never will make any sense. Like you say, it does nothing but inconvenience actual customers. The people that pirate it are rarely deterred for any real length of time. Cracking games has been a thing since the beginning, when "find the 10th word on page 17" piracy protection was first introduced. And it will always be a thing. The entire DRM industry is completely pointless, and I have no idea how it still exists. Publishers are clueless, both about DRMs actual success rate, and how it affects the people actually giving them money.

    9. Re:False premise for DRM. by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      It could be statistics and bloody statistics. Now I understand it, that most gamers, since the advent of entirely bullshit hype marketing and bullshit reviews, were not buying games until months after they have come out, even waiting an year for the first major discount or yeah, the game turns out to be shite and not buying it. This creates an interesting tilt in statistics, if real gamers are waiting, then early buyers will mainly be inexperienced minors and the gullible, a fraction of the entire market, the other big chunk will be pirates who also play the game on release, who now make up a larger percentage because the real gamers are not a part of the market yet, their numbers are missing.

      The pirates of course tell the truth about how crap the game is, spoiling the lets cash in on minors and the gullible faze, which statistically across all games will be the highest selling period because of course shite games, it is their only selling period, once the real lack of quality of the game is exposed, people stop buying it. So interesting statistics, tied to effectiveness of marketing targeting minors and the gullible, with hype and entirely bullshit reviews, which the pirates upset and they are a large percentage of those with early access to the game.

      Pirates disrupt the whole psycho corporate scam of selling shite games with top notch marketing, in the first few weeks and then, well, rinse and repeat. Make shite game, market it well, sell for a few weeks, real reviews kill sales, make another shite game and repeat. Pirates provide real reviews early.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    10. Re:False premise for DRM. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mobile is making profits that is on route to eclipse the entire PC and Console game market combined because of the locked down nature of smart phones and the fact they've put gambling interface on it for the super rich, super stupid, and super impulsive.

      It's the latter, not the former. Smart phones are, at least as far as piracy concerned, one of the least locked down devices; even though there are unrootable phones, it's trivial to buy one that is rootable and there's tons of websites that not only provide pirated games but also pirated games that are cheat hacked to unlock everything. What the mobile space learned is that getting people to pay $50 up front for "a mobile game" was hard but making it easy to spend money could overall draw in an average of $50/user because of whales. This is precisely the same reason Steam and GOG succeeded, not DRM. If have enough sales to lure people in, there's enough whales to make it worthwhile.

      Rockstar has drm out the wazoo and who's game is fully drm'd for shark cards, which is why they were threatening hackers. They want those mtx and gambling money badly. Same with epic and fortnite. Now they are fully incentivized never to give you the game you are paying for ever again.

      Multiplayer games are definitely big business, especially in the "customization" skins area. But the control expressed has virtually nothing to do with DRM and everything to do with server side verification. Yet games that try to be wholly a server side affair tend to fail, even when free (some subscription play services are barely holding on and I don't have a lot of confidence in any long-term sustainability). The point is, users need to feel they have some level of control* and too much server side management kills that feeling which kills the incentive to "earn/own" anything.

      Considering the general crackdown on gambling and the push back from players about actually owning virtual goods, I'm not sure how long the whole skin market really will last. Producers rushing to clone the model won't magically magnify the numbers to anything close to scale. I mean, the total fortnite/pubg player counter may be close to (not counting [gaming] population growth) saturation or it might be 20% or something. There's a lot more than 10 game producers, though.

      * MMOs are the main exception, but they're overall a drop in the bucket in revenue. That WoW was popular with a different market lead some to believe it was a sustainable long-term revenue stream for the mass market, but people burn out on MMOs either from level capping or just the grind of it as friends/guilds leave them which, honestly, is the main reason most people stick with MMOs long-term. Not enough fresh blood joins as new MMOs form.

    11. Re:False premise for DRM. by Falos · · Score: 1

      >I bought a game because I couldn't pirate it immediately
      >This is MOST people
      You gotta turn your baseball cap backwards before you rap with us, fellow game enthusiast.

    12. Re:False premise for DRM. by SuperDre · · Score: 1

      Well, DRM/copyprotection was needed/introduced due to people copying it from each other.. You can't dismis the fact that without DRM people would just buy 1 copy with a group of friends and copy it among themselves (that happened a lot in the past). If people in the past just bought a copy and not share it with others, then there was no need for DRM/copyprotection, it's due to that that companies had to try and find ways to protect their income.

  8. Simple solutions by mysidia · · Score: 0

    Forget relying on a pre-package DRM solution. Make games where internet access is a necessity to enjoy the game.

    When the game boots have some data structures with critical assets that must be loaded from data that is only available on servers.

    Release day should also be the day that a new protection layer is introduced, so even if the pre-relase DRM had been cracked, somehow; folks would have to start over after release.

    1. Re:Simple solutions by DRJlaw · · Score: 5, Funny

      When the game boots have some data structures with critical assets that must be loaded from data that is only available on servers.

      We've found our next publisher-industry consultant folks, call off the search. "New idea" that retreads concepts that have been in use for years -- product activation and/or required-all-the-time internet access -- CHECK. Consumer hostile mechanism that ensures that once the publisher loses interest and takes down the servers, the consumer loses their ability to use what they've purchased -- CHECK.

      Release day should also be the day that a new protection layer is introduced, so even if the pre-relase DRM had been cracked, somehow; folks would have to start over after release.

      Updating DRM on the release copy while magically thinking that the previous version wouldn't have roadmapped how to defeat it -- CHECK.

      You're the trifecta, man. Get your resume out there.

    2. Re:Simple solutions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've seen games try to do this somewhat seamlessly - most notably Gratuitous Space Battles which you could play offline, but had a much larger strategic scope when played online - but if you're going to cut me off from gaming at all without an internet connection, you're barking up the wrong tree. I live in Podunk NH, and speedy, reliable internet is often not available. If your game forces me online, I won't be able to play it.

    3. Re:Simple solutions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about make good games with DRM? People will buy the game if it's good. I like the one stance a DRM free developer has... they work to provide the best experience for their paying customers, and don't waste time worrying about the ones that aren't paying them.

    4. Re:Simple solutions by mysidia · · Score: 1

      that ensures that once the publisher loses interest and takes down the servers, the consumer loses their ability to use what they've purchased

      This doesn't have to be customer hostile. Since we're primarily concerned about protecting the software at release --- how about delivering a patch scheduled for 1 year after release that removes DRM to ease the maintenance burden and load on the servers.

      We can avoid requiring "continuous internet access" by "downloading such and such data payload for offline use" but maintaining it in encrypted forms taking advantage of the hardware TPM module on gamers' PCs to perform a hardware-secured authorization over the internet to issue a credential that is valid for a specified period of time to authorize access to certain bits by a trusted agent system.

      Updating DRM on the release copy while magically thinking that the previous version wouldn't have roadmapped how to defeat it -- CHECK.

      Only if people trying to crack the software are content running a before release version of the game.
      At least daily within the first few weeks of release then weekly, then monthly there should be planned updates, and those running a cracked version of a new title will find themselves hindered or be missing out severely.
      That is by design the original code will not be as intended, and there may even be bugs designed in to render progression impossible that will have a timed update rollout before we expect the first players to reach that point in the game ---- and the updates/patches will of course include planned re-generation of certain security sections rendering cracked games unable to work with the updates.

    5. Re:Simple solutions by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      Forget relying on a pre-package DRM solution. Make games where internet access is a necessity to enjoy the game.

      When the game boots have some data structures with critical assets that must be loaded from data that is only available on servers.

      It's been tried many times, and many people cry out "always on internet drm sucks". Microsoft tried it for an entire console, too. And nevermind the likes of Ubisoft which proposed doing it for all their games.

      Maybe all the PC needs is to drop the AAA games and live on with indies, online and free to play. It's not unusual, since that was the general state of most gaming pre-Denuvo with MMOs being particularly popular.

    6. Re:Simple solutions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Forget relying on a pre-package DRM solution. Make games where internet access is a necessity to enjoy the game.

      When the game boots have some data structures with critical assets that must be loaded from data that is only available on servers.

      I work for a month in a remote location with poor internet. If the game doesn't work without internet, I won't be parting with money for it.

    7. Re:Simple solutions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >and the updates/patches will of course include planned re-generation of certain security sections rendering cracked games unable to work with the updates.

      You know cracking groups release cracked updates, too, right?

      You're trying to re-invent the wheel, only yours is octagonal...

    8. Re:Simple solutions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hold on, take a step back. Realize that DRM is fundamentally impossible as long as the user has physical access to the machine. You wouldn't leave your laptop powered up on the floor of DEFCON, would you? That's what game studios are doing. The game is running on a machine they do not control. They can't stop full analysis. The only way to do it is to never, ever let the code run on an uncontrolled machine. That essentially boils down to fully streaming the game without distributing it. Game studios might actually be stupid enough to try this. Enjoy your latency, crap compression, and extreme data usage if it happens.

  9. Answers to the questions by BringsApples · · Score: 1

    Does DRM make financial sense to include in titles if they risk being cracked before release date?

    The purpose of DRM is to prevent unauthorized redistribution of digital media and restrict the ways consumers can copy content they've purchased. So no.

    Conversely, does releasing games early to selected customers make financial sense if it results in the DRM being cracked before release?

    They keep doing it, so it must be worth it to them. The inverse of this would be to ask: "Does it make financial sense to purchase a game, if it's just going to get old (boring) later anyway?"

    --
    Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
    1. Re:Answers to the questions by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      The purpose of DRM is to prevent unauthorized redistribution of digital media and restrict the ways consumers can copy content they've purchased. So no.

      You didn't answer the question. In fact your reply includes no hint of economics or finance. The question you answered:
      "Is DRM good from the perspective of the consumer" is not the question which was asked.

      They keep doing it, so it must be worth it to them.

      You haven't been paying attention. They don't keep doing it. Actually this is a very new trend in the industry. A lot of previous pre-order bonuses included gimmicky extras, or early betas not relevant to the release. The closest second that is related to the current trend of releasing games early was to allow an encrypted download.

      But to your next point:

      The inverse of this would be to ask: "Does it make financial sense to purchase a game, if it's just going to get old (boring) later anyway?"

      That is not the inverse of the question. That is a completely different question and the answer to that is a resounding yes. Do you re-watch football matches? No of course not. The result would be boring as heck knowing not only the outcome but also the game itself. That future boredom (akin to the lack of replayability) has no bearing on the initial joy/entertainment one may get from a game.

    2. Re:Answers to the questions by BringsApples · · Score: 1
      The question:

      Does DRM make financial sense to include in titles if they risk being cracked before release date?

      My answer (re-worded for you):

      The purpose of DRM is to prevent people from redistributing and restrict the ways copying happens. So if people are still able to do this, then the purpose of DRM has been defeated, causing the DRM to be pointless. So the answer, also in my last post, is "no".

      You haven't been paying attention. They don't keep doing it. Actually this is a very new trend in the industry.

      Man, you lost all possibilities of respect from this community here on slashdot with that comment. You simply need to look up DRM and when it started. I think it was 1983, but let's see what wikipedia says...

      In 1983, a very early implementation of Digital Rights Management (DRM) was the Software Service System (SSS) devised by the Japanese engineer Ryuichi Moriya.

      At least we agree on the last item, even if you don't know what the word "inverse" means.

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
    3. Re:Answers to the questions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does DRM make financial sense to include in titles if they risk being cracked before release date?

      The purpose of DRM is to prevent unauthorized redistribution of digital media and restrict the ways consumers can copy content they've purchased. So no.

      Wrong! The purpose of DRM is to make more money for the publishers. So long as enough people purchase the game that wouldn't otherwise to cover the cost of the DRM, DRM makes sense. It doesn't really matter when pirates crack it. Even if it has been cracked, so long as enough customers are ignorant of the crack that wouldn't pay otherwise, DRM would make sense.

      Does this calculation lead to a positive sum justifying DRM? Judging by the continued existence of DRM, the answer is yes.

    4. Re:Answers to the questions by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      The purpose of DRM is to prevent people from redistributing and restrict the ways copying happens. So if people are still able to do this, then the purpose of DRM has been defeated, causing the DRM to be pointless. So the answer, also in my last post, is "no".

      And yet you still didn't answer the question. The question has a premise that is linked to a certain time window around the release date. Any answer you give that doesn't include this premise isn't answering the question. This premise comes through even if you take that question out of context of the rest of the paragraph, context that includes phrases like "sale day advantage of DRM".

      You're still talking about DRM in a general case, an answer that presents a different economic proposition when compared with a time element.

      Man, you lost all possibilities of respect from this community here on slashdot with that comment. You simply need to look up DRM and when it started.

      Actually with your reading comprehension skills I think it's your respect that is going downhill here. You continue to ignore the time bounds of the question even as you read my clearly time bounded response. Given that I just posted an article with references to DRM from many years ago and said in my reply to you "this is a very new trend" I would have thought that you'd start to release there is something fundamentally in the discussion you're missing. Unless that is you can point me to where Wikipedia says that companies have been defeating their own DRM efforts through early release of titles to people who pre-order games. Go ahead, look that one up on Wikipedia while you ponder what it is that we're actually discussing here and how you have managed to waste so much time typing without even understanding what it is that is being discussed.

    5. Re:Answers to the questions by BringsApples · · Score: 1

      Yes sir. I will try to do better. Thank you.

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
  10. Turning away customers by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

    The only thing DRM does is turn away paying customers. If you don't want me to buy your game, the first thing you should do is disrespect me; treat my PC as if you owned it, everything I do on it, everything associated with it.

    --
    Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    1. Re:Turning away customers by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

      Yeah! Who the fuck do they think they are?

      My gaming PC belongs to Microsoft!

      Oh wait...

      --
      #DeleteFacebook
  11. Re: First !!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First to die

  12. Shiny new DRM by Bobrick · · Score: 1

    I understand why the publishers -want- DRM, but why are they still surprised when it's cracked wide open? They always were, always will be.

    1. Re:Shiny new DRM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DRM did its job on Assassins Creed and Tomb Raider. The vast majority of game sales are in the first month. After that developers really don't care if the DRM is broken.

    2. Re:Shiny new DRM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they don't care, then they should remove the DRM after three months, or even six months. I would be curious to see if there was a noticeable spike in sales after an announcement was made that DRM has been removed. I know I have bought games when they eventually showed up on GOG. I've also bought games from other sources once DRM was removed from the release, or the DRM could be patched out with an official patch.

    3. Re: Shiny new DRM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because it would entice more people to wait for it to be removed.

    4. Re: Shiny new DRM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As opposed to waiting for the crack so they can pirate it?

  13. Moot Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Conversely, does releasing games early to selected customers make financial sense if it results in the DRM being cracked before release?

    Selected customers? I've never encountered an "early" release that was for just a random number of preorders. If you preordered, you got it on the "early release" day. In which case, for all intents and purposes that is the real release date and the question is moot.

  14. The publisher DID REMOVE Denuvo from 2016's HITMAN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's worth noting that the publisher/developer DID REMOVE Denuvo from the 2016 HITMAN at some point after release, so they're at least a little more responsible than other publishers who leave that crap there forever, losing my business in the process.

    It's also worth noting that the 2016 HITMAN had a great Linux release by Feral Interactive (who have done Linux versions of other notable AAA titles, like Rise of the Tomb Raider, Mad Max) and there's no Denuvo for Linux (thankfully).

    Anyone who wants to avoid Denuvo should follow the relevant curators on Steam. Also be sure to read the EULA on the game's store page and use ctrl+F to find Denuvo or DRM.

  15. Best Part of DRM... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is listening to people that write a few customizations and reports for software the employer pays 6 figures a year to keep, complain about a game that requires a one-time two-digit figure to use for basically forever.

    The only difference is who pays. Very telling differential analysis.

  16. Watermarks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Instead of pre-releasing with DRM intact, try pre-releasing with watermarks.

  17. DRM is like locking your bed room door. by jellomizer · · Score: 1

    With most simple locks the door to say your bed room can be easily opened, however 99% of the time, if it is locked people will do the bare minimum to open it. Turn the handle and push on the door. It didn't work, then they stop.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re:DRM is like locking your bed room door. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only, in this case, there is something valuable in your bedroom and bunch of people really enjoy picking locks and giving away copies of the keys to anybody interested. And you keep changing the lock, but the same happens again and again and again.

  18. Shamus Young has an insightful appraisal of Denuvo by Lanthanide · · Score: 5, Informative

    One of my favourite gaming authors has an insightful appraisal of Denuvo and how effective it is. His conclusion is that it's already proven all the publisher's claims about piracy to be lies and in doing so has made itself redundant.

    If you want to learn more about what Denuvo is and how it works from a games programmer and (good) author, then it's well worth a read.

    Here's the main thrust of the article:
    > On the other hand, I stand by the point I made four years ago: Denuvo is so good it proved it was useless.
    >
    > For years, consumers complained about intrusive DRM. It locks you out of your legitimately purchased product.
    > It creates bugs and slowdowns. It’s a hassle. It makes it impossible to run the game years later when the servers
    > go down. It punishes legitimate customers while doing nothing to inconvenience the pirates.
    >
    > In response to these concerns, publishers would tell us that strong DRM was necessary because of rampant piracy.
    > Piracy was blamed for high prices, or for a refusal to port games to the PC. Developers claimed that between 90%
    > and 95% of players were using pirated copies. This led publishers to make absurd claims that game prices would be
    > lower or that they wouldn’t need to close so many studios if there weren’t so many dang pirates,. The assumption was
    > that if 90% of players are pirates, then games would make ten times as much money if we could stop piracy. All those
    > pirates would run out and buy legitimate copies and it would usher in a golden age of low prices and profitability.
    >
    > Tomb Raider 2013 pre-dates Denuvo. Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Rise of the Tomb Raider were both protected
    > by Denuvo. And yet we haven’t heard about any miraculous sales spike that caused the second two games to massively
    > outsell the first. If Denuvo makes any difference at all, it must be very slight. Is it even enough to offset the loss of
    > potential customers? If Denuvo was actually making a measurable difference in terms of sales, wouldn’t all games be
    > using it by now?

    https://www.escapistmagazine.c...

  19. DRM people still get paid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do the DRM peddlers still get paid?

    1. Re:DRM people still get paid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Denuvo took their signed contract and money. They're long gone, dude. Fine print doesn't say anything about how well/long it has to work.

  20. DRM must die by Artem+S.+Tashkinov · · Score: 1

    As always DRM makes life difficult for paying customers while pirates enjoy a hassle-free experience. The last example on the list is EA titles which allow you to change your hardware configuration only 5 times during a 24-hours period, so GPU/CPU reviewers end up buying ... several licenses just to be able to carry out their battery of tests across dozens of HW configurations.

    Then we have the usual fuck-ups when companies shut down their DRM/multiplayer servers which makes it impossible to play uncracked games. Then there are games which require a stable internet connection, so that always-on-DRM could work, so you can't get anywhere once you got disconnected for various reasons. The list goes on and on.

  21. It's about kids by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    you're thinking like an adult with a job. As a kid I'd pirate because it was easier than begging for new games. Kids are still a significant amount of game sales.

    To be fair though I'd be free to play, especially Fortnight, is hurting way more than piracy every did in that market.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  22. Final Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We all know how that worked out for others...

  23. If only they weren't so greedy by hyades1 · · Score: 1

    There's a relatively easy, straightforward solution to the piracy problem, but manufacturers are too greedy to consider it. Simply don't release a game at all until a pre-defined number of paid orders has been received. Deal with updates in a similar fashion. Nobody gets that great new weapon until enough people have bucked up for it.

    Step two would be a free release with a few not-too-annoying nags built in to encourage people to pay. Stay under the threshold where average gamers decide it's worth pirating rather than playing the slightly disadvantaged legal/free version, or buying the game outright.

    These people need to learn that the days when putting a game on the market was a ticket to perpetual royalties is well and truly over.

    --
    I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
  24. That's not the basic premise. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The "big idea" is this: intellectual property has a value. Giving it away for free diminishes that value, which in turn diminishes the wealth of its owner (not the consumers, the IP owner). Failing to include DRM is the market equivalent of giving it away for free. Therefore, DRM must be included, in order to protect the value of the intellectual property.

    Sales are just a means of monetizing the value of their IP. They are not, in and of themselves, the full picture.

    1. Re: That's not the basic premise. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Failing to include DRM is the market equivalent of giving it away for free.

      No it isn't

  25. Yea UNIDENTIFIABLE pussy? Try it... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yea UNIDENTIFIABLE pussy? Try it: It'd be the LAST THING your SORRY pussy ass EVER does, I shit you not, you punk bitch!

    APK

    P.S.=> BIG talk but when the CHIPS ARE ON THE TABLE & DOWN? ZIP the SIMIAN CHIMP descendant RUNS - "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" bitch https://games.slashdot.org/com...

  26. Re:Shamus Young has an insightful appraisal of Den by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It has been stated for the last 30+ years. Pirates that pirate games/music/video/media, when unable to pirate it, it does not make them buy it. A copied item does NOT quite equal a lost sale. I am sure there is some level of that. People that are normally incapable of a source for pirated content that will copy/download based on opportunity, but normally would pay.. But I bet it's pretty small. So it makes sense sales did not go up exponentially on un-crackable games.

  27. Endless game of real-life Whack-a-Mole by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All the copy protection and DRM on the planet is just pissing in the wind. It's all cracked sooner or later and the tougher you make it and the more draconic they get legally, the more pissed off it makes people and the more likely people will pirate something. Give up. Just accept that there will be some pilfering and move on.

  28. Re: What's the matter you ignorant SIMIAN? apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    u keep talking trash, it will not end well for u

  29. IMPERSONATING me AGAIN? apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're caught impersonating me c6gunner (your name's the submitter signing "APK") https://linux.slashdot.org/com... & you ALTERED /.ers PRAISE of my work (not yours you don't even HAVE).

    (Don't throw stones if you live in a glass house vs. me: RIGHT ZIP? https://yro.slashdot.org/comme... )

    *** IGNORANT LYING CHIMP "ZIP" SHOT DOWN FOR HIS LIES & TECH FUCKUPS vs. me https://games.slashdot.org/com...

    LIAR ZIP says he has no account "I don't have an account, so I don't have mod points" https://news.slashdot.org/comm...

    Yet LIAR ZIP says he downmods my posts (IMPOSSIBLE MINUS AN ACCOUNT on /.): "I down-modded a few of your post on other threads" - by Anonymous Coward "ZIP" on Thursday October 11, 2018 @11:31AM (#57461058) FROM https://yro.slashdot.org/comme...

    These PUSSY bullshit artists aren't bullies - they're worse - they're pussy ass PUNKS & talkers (all talk "ne'er-do-well" DO-NOTHINGS).

    APK

    P.S.=> Hosts can stop portsmash (blocking downloads of it) "You basically have to already be able to run your own evil code on a machine in order to PortSmash it." from https://www.theregister.co.uk/... not Spectre/Meltdown AFAIK (but it's POSSIBLE it might but NOT TOTALLY SURE here (vs. say, RPC using them which would be REMOTE vs. LOCAL as in portsmash above) per https://meltdownattack.com/mel... &/or https://spectreattack.com/spec... ACADEMIC RESEARCH into their mechanics ) - & U FAIL a PORTFILTERING TEST https://yro.slashdot.org/comme... ... apk

  30. ZIP the TALKING CHIMP (all talk/no action)... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ZIP - who came up w/ the C++ fix 1st here (where YOU said you did & multiple times in your post history) https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... ?

    * I DID YOU LYING PITIFUL NO SKILLS SIMIAN (or accomplishments you can show & I can (folks like & use MY work https://it.slashdot.org/commen... NOT your "hotairware" that doesn't exist - lol!)

    DESPITE saying "I'm a much better programmer than APK" - by Anonymous Coward ZIP on Monday October 08, 2018 @11:27PM (#57449082) FROM https://yro.slashdot.org/comme... )

    You do-NOTHING all talk fucking CHIMP loser... lol!

    IT WOULD HAVE BEEN IMPOSSIBLE FOR YOU TO DO SO PRIOR TO IT there in that debate - mine was 1st reply to raymorris cluing him into C++ bufferoverflow possibles AND HOW TO FIX IT!

    I used ObjectPascal which HAS NO SUCH ISSUE (length's built-into strings).

    Tell us about your "modpoints" you say you don't have (but you did before that) too:

    LIAR ZIP says he has no account "I don't have an account, so I don't have mod points" https://news.slashdot.org/comm...

    Yet LIAR ZIP says he downmods my posts (IMPOSSIBLE MINUS AN ACCOUNT on /.): "I down-modded a few of your post on other threads" - by Anonymous Coward "ZIP" on Thursday October 11, 2018 @11:31AM (#57461058) FROM https://yro.slashdot.org/comme...

    Tell us about CODE SIGNING (which has been STOLEN & ABUSED) https://www.helpnetsecurity.co... MY METHOD CAN'T BE (upmodded +2 INTERESTING in CODING FOR DEFCON no less) https://it.slashdot.org/commen...

    YOU IGNORANT CHIMP!!!

    APK

    P.S.=> You're a joke wannabe, ZACH PATTERSON (now I finally KNOW who & WHERE you are)... apk

  31. Re: IMPERSONATING me AGAIN? apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Alexander Peter Kowalski lives in a run down house in Syracuse, New York.

    You're welcome. Have fun beating his retarded ass.

  32. What's the matter you ignorant SIMIAN? apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's the matter you ignorant SIMIAN "ZIP" "ook ook" (lol) - can't prove you're a 'better coder' vs. https://games.slashdot.org/com... that shows you're not (along w/ you having ZERO to show for yourself).

    * Pusscake, you're ALL talk - a TALKING CHIMP, nothing more... Chimp out monkey, lol!

    APK

    P.S.=> Of course, you're MORE THAN WELCOME to come to my home, face me directly in person & we'll SEE how much "talking" you do then (thru a face full of busted teeth + a fractured JAW, bitch)... apk

  33. Gonna CHIMPOUT simian ZIP? LMAO... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's the matter you ignorant SIMIAN "ZIP" "ook ook" (lol) - can't prove you're a 'better coder' vs. https://games.slashdot.org/com... that shows you're not (along w/ you having ZERO to show for yourself).

    * Pusscake, you're ALL talk - a TALKING CHIMP, nothing more... Chimp out monkey, lol!

    APK

    P.S.=> Of course, you're MORE THAN WELCOME to come to my home, face me directly in person & we'll SEE how much "talking" you do then (thru a face full of busted teeth + a fractured JAW, bitch)... apk

  34. I'll tell you it makes me not want to buy games by rsilvergun · · Score: 3, Informative

    at launch. A lot of times the patches remove the DRM, since they charge per install and why keep paying for DRM 3-6 months after launch day when the pirates have moved on. But that means I'm buying on Gog or on sale, and a lot of games don't launch day 1 on Gog if at all.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  35. Anyone who has the balls to try? apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone who has the balls to try? Dies. You've been FAIRLY warned you UNIDENTIFIABLE anonymous little punk.

    APK

    P.S.=> Try me & find out - especially SIMIAN CHIMP ZIP (total fool) https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... ... apk

  36. Re:Shamus Young has an insightful appraisal of Den by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 1

    > Tomb Raider 2013 pre-dates Denuvo. Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Rise of the Tomb Raider were both protected > by Denuvo. And yet we haven’t heard about any miraculous sales spike that caused the second two games to massively > outsell the first.

    This is hardly "proof" though. It seems entirely plausible that a lot more people might have been more excited by the combination of "next gen"+nostalgia for the 2013 reboot than there would be people excited for subsequent, more incremental iterations.

    Don't get me wrong, I think most DRM is snake oil and have certainly railed against some implementations of it (eg music CD "DRM" which hampered legitimate purchasers while MP3s abounded) in my time. But without some view into an alternate universe it's surely difficult to say categorically, or even probably, what effect DRM has on sales.

    Of course, any publisher claiming that reducing piracy would "usher in a golden age of low prices and profitability" is probably lying as much as the many DRM snake oil sellers. Price is almost entirely determined by what people will pay.

    --
    Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
  37. Re:The publisher DID REMOVE Denuvo from 2016's HIT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The publisher also changed between 2016 and this.

  38. JEALOUS "Lil' Jowie" #1/2 "ZIP" ZachPatterson by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See how STUPID "ZIP" (Zach I. Patterson) CHIMP is (taking credit for what I solved before him) https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... (he needs to LEARN TO READ)!

    I even SHOW ways to do it YOURSELF https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... (he couldn't).

    Delphi/FreePascal/ObjectPascal HAS no issue w/ null-term'd string bufferoverflows - C does, C++ can UNLESS you do what I said 1st loser.

    "I'm a much better programmer than APK" - by Anonymous Coward ZIP on Monday October 08, 2018 @11:27PM (#57449082) FROM https://yro.slashdot.org/comme... yet nothing to show in programs. I can from registered /.ers liking/using/praising my work (& 100k users worldwide too). He can't.

    LIAR ZIP says he has no account "I don't have an account, so I don't have mod points" https://news.slashdot.org/comm...

    Yet LIAR ZIP says he downmods my posts (IMPOSSIBLE MINUS AN ACCOUNT on /.): "I down-modded a few of your post on other threads" - by Anonymous Coward "ZIP" on Thursday October 11, 2018 @11:31AM (#57461058) FROM https://yro.slashdot.org/comme...

    Tell us about CODE SIGNING (which has been STOLEN & ABUSED) https://www.helpnetsecurity.co... MY METHOD CAN'T BE (upmodded +2 INTERESTING in CODING FOR DEFCON no less) https://it.slashdot.org/commen...

    APK

    P.S.=> Hosts can stop portsmash (blocking downloads of it) "You basically have to already be able to run your own evil code on a machine in order to PortSmash it." from https://www.theregister.co.uk/... not Spectre/Meltdown AFAIK (but it's POSSIBLE it might but NOT TOTALLY SURE here (vs. say, RPC using them which would be REMOTE vs. LOCAL as in portsmash above) per https://meltdownattack.com/mel... &/or https://spectreattack.com/spec... ACADEMIC RESEARCH into their mechanics ) - & U FAIL a PORTFILTER TEST https://yro.slashdot.org/comme...

  39. JEALOUS "Lil' Jowie" #2/2 c6gunner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    c6gunner CAUGHT impersonating me (his name's the submitter signing "APK") https://linux.slashdot.org/com... & you ALTERED /.ers PRAISE of my work (not yours you don't even HAVE).

    * ALL because he tried to INSULT me 2 posts parent prior to it & in the one before it I merely asked to PROVE he did better - he cannot (don't throw stones if you live in a GLASS HOUSE chump & RESPECT YOUR BETTERS (me)).

    APK

    P.S.=> Hosts can stop portsmash (blocking downloads of it) "You basically have to already be able to run your own evil code on a machine in order to PortSmash it." from https://www.theregister.co.uk/... not Spectre/Meltdown AFAIK (but it's POSSIBLE it might but NOT TOTALLY SURE here (vs. say, RPC using them which would be REMOTE vs. LOCAL as in portsmash above) per https://meltdownattack.com/mel... &/or https://spectreattack.com/spec... ACADEMIC RESEARCH into their mechanics ) - & U FAIL a PORTFILTER TEST https://yro.slashdot.org/comme...

  40. Cracked twice, actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But neither of them work properly. The majority can't play at all because it crashes or otherwise won't even start, and those that can play only can play the first level, still.

    See reddit's /r/crackwatch or cs.rin.ru's forum thread to see for yourself.

  41. Think different by Crass+Spektakel · · Score: 1

    There aren't many bright crackers left today. I guess the really smart and active guys can be counted on one hand.

    I think it would be cheaper and more efficient to pay every Top10-Cracker some $1000 per day as long as the game stays uncracked.

    --
    "Life is short and in most cases it ends with death." Sir Sinclair
  42. Cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm also thinking that the current pricing models of video games is getting outrageous. Between the pre-order exclusives, various editions, DLC, game passes, etc. games are just getting too expensive. It seems most games today at minimum are $60 for the standard version, +$40 for the game pass.

    The online games with cosmetics are even worse. My son and I have been playing Fortnite. I can believe they want $12 to $20 for a skin, $8 to $12 for a harvesting tool, and $2 to $8 dollars for an emote. I forgot the prices for the gliders. It seems it would be easy for someone to buy a skin with matching harvesting tool and glider for $40. That's as much as a full game after the initial price drop or sale. To top it off with DRM, since all the money goes into the trash when they decide to shut Fortnite down.

    1. Re:Cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Edit - It should read "I can't believe they want "

  43. Ex SafeDisc developer here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... sticking my head over the parapet, and expecting to be shot...
    Piracy really is a major problem for the game developers. They spend millions on a game, and there are people out there who think they have a $DEITY given right to play the game without paying any of the cost of developing it.
    That's theft, just as much as if you walked into a store and picked up the box. So before you flame me - are your ears burning?
    It's a balancing act.
    There are people who won't buy a game because it is copy protected. Not many (1).
    There are people who will go to any lengths not to pay for a game. Those people are not customers.
    There are people who will pay a premium price to get the game as soon as it is released. They are the best customers.
    There are people who will try to get a free copy, and if they can't will buy one.
    The trick is of course not to push people into the first group, and minimise the number in the last group who get a free copy. And yes, there are a lot of people in that last group. I've seen inside information that the publishers don't release.
    An interesting thought for you though - from the point of view of the DRM companies it doesn't matter if piracy is a real problem so long as the publishers perceive it as being one.
    And that footnote (1) - you can really screw up, and push millions of people into the first group with one fell swoop. Just like Sony did on audio CDs.