People don't read EULAs, but they certainly notice when the "minimum specs" on the tin don't work. Such is life.

Performance is more important for games.

How does Denuvo remove control from the user over their computer? Did it force them to buy the game, install it, and launch it?

Sorry to be so flippant and appear as a devils advocate for DRM, but as far as I'm aware Denuvo runs with the game. Unlike ie Punkbuster, which is constantly running with way too high permissions.

This is the same argument as saying “well, Apple should make a walled garden and keep taking ownership away from people who buy hardware, and you should just not buy from them!”. No, ownership over a device should be a human right, and so should be ownership over software you purchased. If I want to enjoy a piece of tech or a game, I should be able to do so instead of being handicapped while Denuvo objectively makes the experience worse for legitimate users (while people who pirate enjoy BETTER experience)

>No, ownership over a device should be a human right

I'm really tired of the trend of people declaring whatever policy they want enacted as being "a human right". Yes, having control over the devices you own is something we should push for, but it's nowhere important to be called a human right.

As we’re starting to rely more and more on the technology, be for identification, information, etc I’d argue ownership should be a human right. It may not be necessarily essential today, but we’re heading in that direction

Eh, trusted computing isn't so much about trusting what's running on your machine but trusting that your machine runs other people's code without any pesky modifications. So I'd say being allowed to run more than government/Microsoft/Apple signed code is something to codify.

Lets "pretend" code is a form of speech.

The underlying sentiment is typically that humans should have the right to live in a comprehensible society that even a below-average person can successfully navigate. Technology threatens this, and it's not just the elderly who fall to the wayside. So while it may annoy you, it is not incorrect to posit that we may need new human rights to deal with this.

>I'm really tired of the trend of people declaring whatever policy they want enacted as being "a human right".

computing became inalienable from human rights when we as a society started asking everyone to conduct mandatory business using them.

paying your bills, gaining access to places, applying for welfare systems, creating doctors appointments, the list goes on -- the things that can be done alternatively over the phone or in-person dwindles as the years tick by.

If we don't claim that certain computing freedoms should be part-and-parcel of human rights then we must wait for the obvious and apparent abuse-of-system to occur and damage society before remediation -- I think we as a society may just have the wisdom to avoid that damage before it happens, but it requires advocacy.

I'm not doubting that computing devices are essential to daily life, but that doesn't really mean we should make it a "human right". If we're adopting that logic, we should also make smartphones (or similar personal computing devices) themselves a human right. After all, what good is control over a device if you don't own one in the first place? While we're at it, let's make cell plans a human right as well, because a smartphone wouldn't be very useful without internet access, and many sites demand a phone number for verification/2fa.

That does sound like a good idea if you put it like that, just not right now. Computers are still a really new field with lots of innovation going on. In the future we might take a government radio-ish approach. Cell (and cable) networks seem easier than roads and cheaper than water.

You’re arguing against the principle of private property. People should be allowed to own things. That’s the most fundamental right humans have. Tech and “innovations” in what counts as consent and an “agreement” have taken that away for most of our most important “purchases”

> while people who pirate enjoy BETTER experience

This is generally true of piracy, but hard to apply to Denuvo:

- in 2022, one Denuvo game was cracked

- you have to wait a long time

- the version cracked might not even be the latest version available at the time of cracking

- you have to deal with a transphobe

Genuinely curious if you also have this same energy towards Steam.

When you start a Denuvo game, it sends various information about your computer (CPUID, OS information, etc) to Denuvo's servers, and the servers in turn generate a license file. The game exe will contain at least a few hundred functions that are VM obfuscated and will use your license file in combination with your computer information to decrypt parts of the code and continue execution. If you change some aspect of your computer hardware, you update your OS, or if the license file expires, the game will download a new license file from Denuvo's servers on launch.

All of this means that when Denuvo's servers get shut down, any game that hasn't been cracked will no longer run.

I also recall there being concerns over what Denuvo does to SSDs. It basically dramatically increases the number of writes to disk, causing them to wear our much faster than they would otherwise.

Would love to see your sources, everything I've found says that's not actually the case

> Causes excessive HDD/SSD reads/writes which degrades the lifespan of storage drives. > > The origins of this rumor are various user reports from 2014 and "tests" performed using Lords of the Fallen and Dragon Age: Inquisition. This has been denied and debunked multiple times by both Denuvo themselves,[13] publishers/developers, and other users since then. As shown in the technical information section, Denuvo Anti-Tamper performs minimal read and write operations to the drive, and there is no benefit to do additional drive reads or writes in terms of security or performance.[14]

https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/Denuvo

It's fine to not like DRM. It's another thing to spread FUD and appeal to emotions.

I recall reading that at the time, and simply choosing to avoid Denuvo and waiting to buy titles that included it.

I'm willing to update my credence on that idea. Thank you.

This is an issue with DRM in general.

I think my issue with the comment I replied to was the appeal to emotion while saying nothing specific about Denuvo.

I feel the ship has sailed on DRM, and that the solution to people feeling slighted because something they purchased contained DRM without them knowing will be stores listing DRM a game uses, not stopping the use of it.

Performance is a space where they can actually make good-faith arguments that their software isn't so bad. Privacy or personal control over one's machine are out the window already.

It's what the gaming community primarily cares about, TBH. I don't blame them.