• gila@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Wait, but they already launched it without Denuvo. So pirates can easily crack the launch version without it, and only paying customers need to deal with the antipiracy bullshit? Nice, they took a pro-piracy hyperbole and made it actually real.

    • Veraxus@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      DRM ONLY ever affects paying customers, ergo DRM is always unethical malware.

      Also, let’s never forget how Ghostwire Tokyo had Denuvo patched IN over a year after release.

      • gila@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Eh, I only meant hyperbole in terms of antipiracy affecting the pirates that had to figure out how to crack it. As a broad gesture at the fact piracy (consumption) depends on piracy (effort) to work

    • Julian@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m thinking this too… like what’s even the point of using denuvo if it’s not applied day one? The whole point is to delay piracy so they sell more copies during launch week (in theory), so waiting until after day one completely ruins that since you can just pirate the easily cracked launch version.

  • AdmiralShat@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think anyone who reviewed it should publish a secondary videos explaining this.

    This seems like it’s legitimately false advertising

  • empireOfLove@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Ubisoft does the Ubisoft thing - nothing new under the sun.

    Refund, refund, refund. The only single thing they will ever care about is the $.