this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2024
123 points (95.6% liked)

Gaming

2520 readers
24 users here now

The Lemmy.zip Gaming Community

For news, discussions and memes!


Community Rules

This community follows the Lemmy.zip Instance rules, with the inclusion of the following rule:

You can see Lemmy.zip's rules by going to our Code of Conduct.

What to Expect in Our Code of Conduct:


If you enjoy reading legal stuff, you can check it all out at legal.lemmy.zip.


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Denuvo's quest to improve its reputation with PC gamers is personal.

all 46 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] lvxferre@mander.xyz 86 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Oh look, Denuvo playing the victim.

And it exemplifies rather well why I hate the word "toxic": bad reputation? Toxic! Criticism? Toxic!

Bullshitting like «it's in part because it "simply works" and would-be pirates are trying to make it unattractive to game publishers by disparaging it.»? Noooo that is not toxic because it aligns with the discourse that Denuvo wants to spread, right?

"I'm with the company for such a long time," said Ullmann. "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."

"Insert personal story to make it look like you aren't criticising software; no, you're criticising a family. You monster~

[–] luciferofastora@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You can be a great person and still write garbage software. Whether you're just doing it because you need money or whether you're misguided and think it's actually good, that doesn't necessarily make you a bad person (and remember: It's hard to get someone to understand something when their salary depends on not understanding it).

Doesn't make the software less garbage.

[–] lvxferre@mander.xyz 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

A person is good or bad depending on their impact on the people around them; as such I don't consider "misguided" a valid defence.

And while someone can be overall a good person while writing socially harmful and user-hostile software, because they have other qualities that compensate it, writing said software still makes them a worse person.

It’s hard to get someone to understand something when their salary depends on not understanding it

So it's hard to be good when your salary depends on you being bad.


Don't get me wrong. I'm analysing this through my moral views, but I don't think that they're the only valid ones. Your mileage may vary.

My other comment was mostly on how idiotic the whole defence is, not about morality (as this one).

[–] luciferofastora@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I was responding to the "Look, they're all nice people" defense you quoted, not contradicting you. I agree with you in principle.


I don't consider "misguided" a valid defence.

My view of morality is largely centered on intent, so "I thought it would be a good thing" is a valid defence (though there is also a degree of responsibility to check assumptions; if you never made any effort to check if it actually is a good thing, that's negligence)

So it's hard to be good when your salary depends on you being bad.

...and by extension, when your livelihood depends on you being bad, yes. Not everyone's livelihood depends on their salary, but for many people it does. If it's hard to find a job that can pay the bills, I don't fault people for the human reflex of justifying bad things to yourself in the name of survival.

(But if they do have a choice and choose to enrich themselves at the expense of others, they're obviously pricks - just saying this might not apply to all the devs involved here).

[–] lvxferre@mander.xyz 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That's fair - and it's clear that your moral premises are, like, diametrically opposed to mine (I completely disregard intent - for me responsibility takes the job).

I was aware that you weren't contradicting me but this sort of discussion is fun, sorry!

[–] luciferofastora@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 month ago

The willingness to be responsible for consequences does factor in. If you round the corner and crash into someone, you probably didn't intend to, but whether you'll be an ass about it and yell at the other person or whether you'll apologise and check they're alright makes a difference.

In a perfect-information-setting, intent equals result: If I know what my actions will cause and continue to carry them out, the difference between "primary objective" and "accepted side-effect" becomes academic. But in most cases, we don't have perfect information.

I feel like the intent-approach better accounts for the blind spots and unknowns. I'll try to construct two examples to illustrate my reeasoning. Consider them moral dilemmas, as in: arguing around them "out of the box" misses the point.

Ex. 1:
A person is trying to dislodge a stone from their shoe, and in doing so leans on a transformator box to shake it out. You see them leaning on a trafo and shaking and suspect that they might be under electric shock, so you try to save them by grabbing a nearby piece of wood and knocking them away from the box. They lose balance, fall over and get a concussion.
Are you to blame for their concussion, because you knocked them over without need, despite your (misplaced) intention to save them?

Ex. 2:
You try to kill someone by shooting them with a handgun. The bullet misses all critical organs, they're rushed to a hospital and in the process of scanning for bullet fragments to remove, a cancer in the earliest stages is discovered and subsequently removed. The rest of the treatment goes without complications and they make a speedy and full recovery.
Does that make you their saviour, despite your intent to kill them?

In both cases, missing information and unpredictable variables are at play. In the first, you didn't know they weren't actually in danger and couldn't predict they'd get hurt so badly. In the second, you probably didn't know about the tumor and couldn't predict that your shot would fail to kill them. In both cases, I'd argue that it's your intent that matters for moral judgement, while the outcome is due to (bad) "luck" in the sense of "circumstances beyond human control coinciding". You aren't responsible for the concussion, nor are you to credit with saving that life.

[–] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Most people that i know that use the word toxic, are the things that they mean when they say toxic. Its a worthless word in the contexts its being used in.

[–] Justas@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago

When a plant or an animal is toxic, very often it's a defense mechanism.

[–] CaptObvious@literature.cafe 76 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The upcoming Dragon Age: The Veilguard will somewhat surprisingly not use Denuvo at all

There’s the tell. Publishers might start listening to their customers, who generate income, rather than their vendors’ sales personnel, who create expenses. He’s panicked over a potential existential crisis.

[–] shani66@ani.social 14 points 1 month ago

Huh. This is literally the best advertising veilguard has ever had.

[–] Clasm@lemmy.world 44 points 1 month ago
[–] _haha_oh_wow_@sh.itjust.works 43 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Have you tried not hurting game performance?

[–] grue@lemmy.world 25 points 1 month ago

Better yet, have they tried not fucking with gamers' property rights by shutting down their criminal company?

[–] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 42 points 1 month ago

Fuck Denuvo. DRM does not benefit the gamer. Period. No amount of gaslighting will change that.

[–] Th4tGuyII@fedia.io 35 points 1 month ago

Denuvo has the reputation it has for a reason, and labeling their critics (most of the gaming community) as salty pirates is not going to help them any.

When it comes to performance claims, why on Earth would I believe the salespeople for Denuvo over the people forced to play with it? The former has every inventive to quash any and all claims of causing performance issues.

[–] ampersandrew@mastodon.world 29 points 1 month ago

@BrikoX The only thing Denuvo can ever do is make the product worse. Plenty of games launch DRM-free, and that's what I want as a customer.

[–] reksas@sopuli.xyz 24 points 1 month ago

denuvo is hostile and toxic program

And just like that my opinion of the steam forums skyrocketed.

[–] Tarogar 23 points 1 month ago (1 children)

To be fair. The Steam forums are actually pretty bad in general and could do with better moderation.

Having said that, there is a reason why some corporations have the reputation that they have. Might want to fix the thing that is causing that reputation instead of blaming everyone else for your bad reputation. But that would be the harder thing to do that takes time and effort and no one likes to put effort in.

[–] QuadratureSurfer@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

What do you mean?
All I see are hearts and love ❤️❤️❤️❤️. /s

[–] hypna@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Skill issue.

[–] Ledivin@lemmy.world 23 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I haven't bought a Denuvo-protected game in about a decade, and that isn't going to change.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 19 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Denuvo-~~protected~~infested

FTFY. The notion that Denuvo "protects" anything whatsoever is itself accidental pro-Denuvo loaded language.

[–] AceFuzzLord@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Unrelated, but I just figured out what FTFY means thanks to your comment.

[–] grue@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Glad to be of service!

[–] Ledivin@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Nah, that's a dumb take. Denuvo does protect from casual piracy - even if only temporarily - that's why companies use it.

It also negatively affects legit consumers, and that is the problem - these publishers have decided that potential profit matters more than actual, realized customers.

[–] catch22@programming.dev 23 points 1 month ago
[–] LiveLM@lemmy.zip 21 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I'm with the company for such a long time," said Ullmann. "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.

It hurts???
I understand he's being paid to gobble corporate dick, but at least try to mask it like most people do lmao

You couldn't pay me to embarrass myself like this

[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 20 points 1 month ago

It's because we fucking hate you, Denuvo.

[–] Bosht@lemmy.world 16 points 1 month ago

Very toxic, and very hostile if you do stupid, dumb corpo bullshit. Fuck this guy.

[–] Reddfugee42@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago
[–] therealjcdenton@lemmy.zip 14 points 1 month ago

Sometimes some people need to get bullied

[–] smokin_shinobi@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago

Fuck Denuvo. They just slithered their way into Undisputed with the 1.0 update and I’m stuck without a boxing game again.

[–] Varyag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Fuck off, Denuvo.

Yes, the Steam forums are awful, but still. Fuck off. Nobody wants you here.

[–] HeckGazer@programming.dev 3 points 1 month ago

Nobody wants Denuvo anywhere Shrivel up and die at earliest convenience plzkthx <3

[–] CaptObvious@literature.cafe 12 points 1 month ago

If I read a forum where people are known to object to what I do, there’s a fair chance I’ll get my feelings hurt. That’s on me.

[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 month ago (3 children)

What's with all the recent articles whitewashing Denuvo?

[–] skizzles@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

They are trying to "save face" by shit talking while refusing to show any true evidence that their product does not impact performance.

People are tired of it so they stop buying games that have Denuvo. Denuvo needs to look like a sound investment, but it's bleeding out because it really isn't, and companies are likely losing more than they are actually gaining via sales because of Denuvo, thus some companies are distancing themselves and Denuvo is losing money.

[–] Sabata11792@ani.social 2 points 1 month ago

The PR firm they hired must have not googled how hated they were ahead of time. How long till we see bots saying hey love getting broken games with spyware.

[–] LiveLM@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 month ago

[...] a new effort by Denuvo to bring PC gamers over to its side, which kicked off with a Discord server last week (it didn't go well) and an interview with Rock Paper Shotgun this week

PR baybeeeeee

[–] Dyskolos@lemmy.zip 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The steam-forums are often toxic and hostile. But denuvo also is and every hate justified. It does absolutely nothing good for the honest consumer. Quite the contrary.

[–] shani66@ani.social 8 points 1 month ago

You know, i prefer my cyberpunk dystopias to be ballsy enough to just say it with their chest. You'd never catch Lofwyr groveling like this.

I'd also very much prefer dragons, or at least technological implants, but whatever.

[–] Rin@lemm.ee 8 points 1 month ago

Awhhh. Noooo. Not the big big corop's feelings. We're all sooooo sorrry. 🤡

[–] edgemaster72@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

lol. lmao, even. cry more Denuvo.