• MudMan
    link
    fedilink
    -51 month ago

    Not to my knowledge, but I bet not being on Steam had more to do with it than Denuvo, by far. There is no indication that DRM software discourages sales, to my knowledge. If it does, at worst it breaks even.

    I will buy the DRM-free option every time, but every piece of data out there suggests that “I will never play a game with Denuvo” people vastly overestimate how much of a practical impact that stance has.

    Me, I’m just weirded out that people are so mad about some solutions they know but not about Steam DRM or any other solution that isn’t known widely by name. You know, since I’m sharing all my unpopular gaming hot takes here.

    • AwesomeLowlander
      link
      fedilink
      English
      41 month ago

      Steam DRM doesn’t have quite the same history of maliciousness towards end users that Denuvo does

      • MudMan
        link
        fedilink
        -61 month ago

        Ah, the vibes.

        I mean, there are worse areas to run based on gut checks. Ultimately you buy whatever brands make you feel warm and cozy. But just so we’re clear, Steam is the granddaddy of both PC DRM and digital distribution with no ownership.

        I get thinking their implementation is better, but I don’t know that I get “well, this one I actively root for, that one I consider a boycott-worthy deal breaker”.

      • MudMan
        link
        fedilink
        -11 month ago

        Well, brand and image are relevant, in more ways than direct sales impact (something that “voting with your wallet” often ignores).

        But mostly, and this is important, it’s worth remembering that Denuvo’s clients aren’t the people who buy their games, they are the people who sell the games. That’s who Denuvo is selling to. And Denuvo, which is a very big, if not the only, name in town for effective DRM on PC, would like to keep being that.

        All else being equal, if Denuvo generates negativity in forums and a similar no-name competitor doesn’t a client (that’s a publisher, not a buyer of the game), may choose to go with the newcomer just to remove the noise, or to prevent an impact on sales they can’t verify.

        But also, I imagine people working at Denuvo are kind of over being the random boogeyman of gaming du jour while other DRM providers are actively praised or ignored. I’d consider speaking up, too.

        I probably wouldn’t because there’s very little to be gained from that, as this conversation proves, but… you know, I’d consider it.

        EDIT: Oh, hey, I hadn’t noticed, but the guy actually responds to this explicitly. Pretty much along these lines, actually:

        RPS: A lot of companies seem happy enough with the service Denuvo provides to keep using it. Why are you so concerned about public perception? Why not just let people have their theories and carry on doing your thing?

        Andreas Ullmann: Hard to answer. So maybe it’s just… maybe it’s even a personal thing. I’m with the company for such a long time. The guys here are like my family, because a lot of the others here are also here for ages. It just hurts to see what’s posted out there about us, even though it has been claimed wrong for hundreds of times.

        On the other hand, I can imagine that this reputation also has some kind of business impact. I can imagine that certain developers, probably more in the indie region or the smaller region, are not contacting us in the first place if they are looking for solutions.

        Because currently, there is only two ways to protect a game against piracy, right? Either you don’t, or use our protection. There is no competitor. And I can imagine that there are developers out there who are hesitant to contact us, only because of the reputation. They would probably love to prevent piracy for their game, but they fear the hate and the toxicity of the community if they do so. And maybe they even believe all the claims that are out there - unanswered from us until today - and for this reason don’t contact us in the first place.