Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Friday May 19 2017, @07:23AM   Printer-friendly
from the and-a-bottle-of-rum dept.

Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard

Ah, Denuvo; the anti-tamper tech that a lot of gamers hate. And while some people may claim that this attitude comes from the fact that the games powered by it are hard to crack, the latest triple-A game powered by it, PREY, has already been cracked.

While it did not break the record for the fastest Denuvo-powered game cracked, it’s a real surprise that the latest, and more powerful, version of the Denuvo is unable to protect these games for more than ten days.

For what it’s worth, Resident Evil VII remains the fastest cracked Denuvo-powered game as it was cracked in just five days, while Mass Effect: Andromeda is close to PREY as it was cracked in ten – more or less – days.

Source: Dark Side of Gaming


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by anubi on Friday May 19 2017, @08:14AM (11 children)

    by anubi (2828) on Friday May 19 2017, @08:14AM (#512077) Journal

    To me, having DRM on something is like I do not really own it. Someone else does.

    Its kinda like me having to ask someone else's permission to drive "my" van, and they have the power to say "no. You didn't obey something we imposed on you."

    I had just as soon not have that hand in my life if I can avoid it.

    Especially if the denial or frustration of putting up with the hand is not considered grounds for returning the thing for full monetary refund.

    --
    "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Friday May 19 2017, @08:35AM (10 children)

    by cubancigar11 (330) on Friday May 19 2017, @08:35AM (#512084) Homepage Journal

    There is a middle ground here but I think we don't have a process to find it, or later calibrate it. We need to make a distinction between two markets - those who want to own and those who want to pass over. For example, on Origin you can pay for a "pass" that lets you play any game for 1 month (and only some chapters of some of the AAA games like Mirror's edge). I know people who are using that pass. They don't care about owning the game. So that is one step in the right direction. The other part ought to be removing DRM (along with increase in price) for those who want to own the game.

    Right now, we don't really know the price of a game actually. Game publishers set it with some expectation of sales and some imaginary net profit to be made. For example, Mirror's Edge Catalyst was a thoroughly mediocre game (what a shame since I have played the original many times). Yet it goes for the same price as Witcher 3! Same example for comparing price of DLCs - there is no logic between content and its price.

    What I am trying to get at, is that because of this mess in pricing, there is no way to know how much a non-DRM'd version of a game will cost. We need to find a way to set this pricing correctly or the big publishers will keep charging exorbitant amounts with less and less service.

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by anubi on Friday May 19 2017, @09:11AM (3 children)

      by anubi (2828) on Friday May 19 2017, @09:11AM (#512096) Journal

      Ok... maybe I should have stated I am 65+ and retired... and my childhood memories of games was something in a box bought at a store.

      The idea of DRM on a game is very asinine to me. To me, its like a toy which insists on making contact with Milton-Bradley first before I could play with it.

      I would not even want such a thing.

      With DRM on stuff, its like I am a teenager again, having to beg Dad for use of the car. At which time he states things he wants done before the use of the car is allowed. EULA, so to say.

      It puzzles me why people have accepted this "gotta phone home first for permission" thing without also demanding full refund rights is beyond me.

      I never even once played the Tetris game that came preinstalled on my phone because the game insisted that I had an internet connection open before it would run.

      Same with NextRadio on my Android. That DRM crap made what I thought was just enabling an FM receiver chip on my phone into a useless piece of baggage just sucking down my battery. These DRM people are just as annoying as a swarm of mosquitoes, each trying their damndest to get a drop of blood.

      If I had my druthers, people would avoid DRM stuff like they avoid picking up a vegetable which is covered in brown slimy goo at the market.

      --
      "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
      • (Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Friday May 19 2017, @10:02AM (2 children)

        by cubancigar11 (330) on Friday May 19 2017, @10:02AM (#512103) Homepage Journal

        I know what you are saying. Until 3 years ago I was in the same ship. So much that I hadn't played the latest and greatest AAA games at all. But then I played a pirated copy of TESV: Skyrim, right after I had built a new PC. It blew my mind. I had to give them my money. So I sucked it up and paid them.

        Now I gave an example of Witcher 3, which I have bought on Steam aka phone-home DRM. But I could have bought it on GOG without DRM too. But steam reduced price for my poor poor country while GOG insisted on earning in dollars.

        Now PS4 allows complete owning of games if you buy them on the disc. But they are the last one afaik.

        Ultimately, there is a lot of market inefficiency here and there is a lot of resistance in making it mainstream. I hope it gets resolved over time but I don't see anyone trying to do it beside Valve. And they are not friends of the gamers [polygon.com].

        • (Score: 1) by anubi on Saturday May 20 2017, @10:53AM (1 child)

          by anubi (2828) on Saturday May 20 2017, @10:53AM (#512577) Journal

          I have also bought software after I got the pirate version. I still remember the very first PC software I purchased after "pirating" a copy... Steve Gibson's "Spin-Rite".

          I was having issues with my first PC, which I had made from scrounged parts. A friend loaned me his copy of Spin-Rite, and I was so impressed of how well it gave me such a nice detailed report of the disk drives I had bought at swap meets. And there was my problem. Those disks were at the swap meet for a reason: They had given someone else problems too. Now I knew what a crashed disk was. Open it up and see the nice concentric rings etched out of the oxide layers on the disk platters. While its open, take the magnets out ( they work great holding stuff onto your refrigerator! ) , pull off the PCB, and throw the rest in the trash.

          Maybe that deal on a disk drive, selling for $400 new at the time, wasn't such a steal at $20, eh? Well, they *looked* good. How was I to know he was selling them out of the box the new replacements came in? Ok... older and a bit wiser. I ended up with a few PCB's full of interesting high speed analog parts and motor driver chips.

          I went to the local software store to buy a copy of Spin-Rite, even though the copy I borrowed was working fine. To me, it just wasn't "right" to steal like that. Yes, I did see it as "theft" because the software was so perfect, and the price was not very high. I was looking for it around the store, and could not find it, asked the clerk, he had it behind the counter, as it was not packaged in a fancy large box for resale, it was just one 5 1/4" floppy disk in a modest folder apparently run off by Steve Gibson himself for all I know, and the clerk had them behind the counter so people would not steal them. I damn near lost it in uncontrollable laughter. I already had the software. What I wanted was a paid-for legitimate copy for ME!. About the LAST thing I would have done was steal the disk. I loved that program so much I was determined to pay for it, one way or the other. If similar had happened today, I would have probably looked Steve Gibson's company up on the internet, and sent Gibson anonymous cash payment in an envelope marked "personal", with a little note that I have a copy of his software, he does not need to send me anything, but here's the payment for it. That's generally how I deal with the stuff I run across that I actually use and keep. I would say less than 1 percent of stuff I look at has any value to me. I may look at it, I may archive it, but if I use it, I feel morally I am obligated to pay the author for the use of it.

          If I really got technical on the first software for anything I bought, it was an assembler for the 8080, followed by the 6502 macro assembler for the Commodore 64.

          None of the above were DRM'd. They just worked. Perfectly.

          The DRM'd crap out there is not worth anything to me.

          --
          "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
          • (Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Sunday May 21 2017, @04:38AM

            by cubancigar11 (330) on Sunday May 21 2017, @04:38AM (#512882) Homepage Journal

            The DRM'd crap out there is not worth anything to me.

            A true position to take. But what about people who really don't care about owning things? If I want to rent a game for 2 days, DRM is just an equivalent of the police. For them DRM is essential to enforce the time limit on a rented property.

            This is why I am saying that there are two different markets - those who want to own and those who want to rent. Right now, because of what I consider a market inefficiency, the producers/publishers of games are getting away with enforcing the rules of rent on people who want to own. That was my original point. HTH and thanks for reading :)

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 19 2017, @01:06PM (5 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 19 2017, @01:06PM (#512147)

      There is a middle ground here but I think we don't have a process to find it, or later calibrate it.

      If your "middle ground" involves any amount of digital restrictions management or proprietary software, then forget it. Those who don't value their privacy or freedom can continue living in their little prisons and never really own anything, while at least some people will reject all of that. No amount of entertainment is worth sacrificing my freedom and/or privacy for.

      • (Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Friday May 19 2017, @01:34PM (4 children)

        by cubancigar11 (330) on Friday May 19 2017, @01:34PM (#512156) Homepage Journal

        The "middle ground" was explained in the next sentence. Thanks for not reading.

        • (Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Friday May 19 2017, @03:12PM (3 children)

          by tangomargarine (667) on Friday May 19 2017, @03:12PM (#512215)

          For some things there is no reasonable middle ground, e.g. "How much sewage would you be okay with me putting in your drinking water? A gallon? A cup? A drop?" Presumably that was his point.

          --
          "Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 20 2017, @02:54AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 20 2017, @02:54AM (#512504)

            I think you missed the point that Cuban's most recent point is that AC missed the point, and everybody needs to actually go and read that comment instead of circle-jerk-knee-jerking to a sentence introducing a much more nuanced idea.

            Personally I did read past the first sentence, and I thought that Cuban made a fair point. A++++ would read again.

            I mean, isn't that the point???

            If not... what's the point?

            (This must be why old men don't bother with making points. There's no point.)

          • (Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Sunday May 21 2017, @04:29AM (1 child)

            by cubancigar11 (330) on Sunday May 21 2017, @04:29AM (#512877) Homepage Journal

            That is one position, which is a valid position. Yet there are people who don't care about owning anything digitally and would rather perpetually rent it. For example, I know people who don't plan to own a house ever. Or a better example - I know people who don't care about the source code of the software they use. Does catering to those people an inherently bad thing?

            • (Score: 1) by anubi on Sunday May 21 2017, @05:39AM

              by anubi (2828) on Sunday May 21 2017, @05:39AM (#512898) Journal

              Oh crap... I hit the wrong "reply" button.

              Here's where it went. [soylentnews.org]

              --
              "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]