I get that people don’t like the thought of “I’m not fully owning my game” which is reasonable, but in that case, your reason for not playing pargmata shouldn’t be denuvo, but steam itself.
This is whataboutism. They’re both DRM, they’re both bad. I should point out though that it is up to the developer/publisher whether they use Steam DRM. There are games on Steam that you can play the game without Steam (Cyberpunk 2077 for example).
As far as your comments about anti-cheats… at least those are actually trying to do something for the gameplay experience. Where people disagree with them is how it is going about it or whether different multiplayer models might negate the need for it.
DRM though exists solely for the publishers/developers, is very debatable whether it has much real benefits for them and is always a negative for customers. IMO DRM is the far more important issue in gaming.
It’s not. If “That game has denuvo so I won’t buy it because I hate DRM” if a stance you have, you should also not buy it because of Steam’s DRM. Otherwise you’re not true to your own word and therefore unbelievable.
IMO DRM is the far more important issue in gaming.
Anti-Cheat is on kernel level with far more elevated rights. You don’t know what vanguard or EAC are doing on your system at any given time because these applications literally have more rights than you. They also require full compatibility on the OS, which is why league doesn’t work on linux since the introduction of vanguard.
On the other hand, denuvo is running as a userspace process that, at worst, wastes a handful of CPU cycles and costs publishers a ton of money.
Dunno, I got WAY more gripes with anti-cheat than denuvo.
It’s not. If “That game has denuvo so I won’t buy it because I hate DRM” if a stance you have, you should also not buy it because of Steam’s DRM. Otherwise you’re not true to your own word and therefore unbelievable.
Strawman fallacy. You’re arguing against something I didn’t say. I did in fact say “They’re both DRM, they’re both bad.”.
As surprising as it may be for you, it’s possible to be against both anti-cheat and DRM, which I am. You’re the one here defending Denuvo and trying to minimise other people’s opinions on it.
I won’t be replying anymore as you’re clearly not here in good faith.
I think it’s valid to point to exceptionalism in the reasoning.
Excuse racism as an analogy here; but if a homeowner complains “That young man has been loitering around that corner store all day! He’s up to no good!” then a good cop (yes, I know) should rightfully point out “So, that young man is black. To be clear, your issue is with loitering, so you also have an issue with that white boy that’s loitering around another corner store, right?” If the homeowner’s response is “I didn’t say that!!” then it suddenly becomes telling as to why they have a favorable view of one circumstance and not another, even if they’re not verbally stating “I don’t like black kids!”.
You said they’re both “bad”, but by lack of mention, it sounds like you’re not boycotting Steam’s, and if I had to guess, it’s due to effectiveness; so long as it can be circumvented, you don’t especially care, right? For the purposes of the argument, circumvention and performance are two very distinct concerns. If it can be shown that Steam DRM also affects performance, what would be your opinion then?
This is the only true thing you said. Everything else is your assumptions that you argue against as a strawman.
The arguments I’ve made here stand on their own and I’m not going to jump through hoops to try to pass your manipulative and extremely transparent purity test.
That was also the only factual assertion I made. I posited a guess afterwards, and drew potential conclusions afterwards.
You’re free to analyze my assumptions, which I label as assumptions, as incorrect, and give a further explanation of why one thing is true and another is not. But if you’re entering an argument refusing to make statements, OR supporting/negating suggested statements, that’s pretty much the definition of arguing in bad faith. Your arguments don’t “stand on their own” if you’re not open to discussion of their potential flaws.
If you don’t want to comment, just keep your hand off the Post button. No one hates you for that.
You sound like a twitter lawyer. “STRAWMAN!” - “WHATABOUTISM!”.
You’re arguing against something I didn’t say.
You never said it, however, you implied that SteamDRM is acceptable while Denuvo is fine. Which, in my book, is a contradiction if you say you’re against DRM in particular.
You’re the one here defending Denuvo and trying to minimise other people’s opinions on it.
I’m not defending it, I’m just wondering why Denuvo leads people to not buying games but being all fine with using SteamDRM (they’re both DRM after all) or highly invasive anti-cheat. It just makes no sense to me.
I won’t be replying anymore as you’re clearly not here in good faith.
This is whataboutism. They’re both DRM, they’re both bad. I should point out though that it is up to the developer/publisher whether they use Steam DRM. There are games on Steam that you can play the game without Steam (Cyberpunk 2077 for example).
As far as your comments about anti-cheats… at least those are actually trying to do something for the gameplay experience. Where people disagree with them is how it is going about it or whether different multiplayer models might negate the need for it.
DRM though exists solely for the publishers/developers, is very debatable whether it has much real benefits for them and is always a negative for customers. IMO DRM is the far more important issue in gaming.
It’s not. If “That game has denuvo so I won’t buy it because I hate DRM” if a stance you have, you should also not buy it because of Steam’s DRM. Otherwise you’re not true to your own word and therefore unbelievable.
Anti-Cheat is on kernel level with far more elevated rights. You don’t know what vanguard or EAC are doing on your system at any given time because these applications literally have more rights than you. They also require full compatibility on the OS, which is why league doesn’t work on linux since the introduction of vanguard.
On the other hand, denuvo is running as a userspace process that, at worst, wastes a handful of CPU cycles and costs publishers a ton of money.
Dunno, I got WAY more gripes with anti-cheat than denuvo.
Strawman fallacy. You’re arguing against something I didn’t say. I did in fact say “They’re both DRM, they’re both bad.”.
As surprising as it may be for you, it’s possible to be against both anti-cheat and DRM, which I am. You’re the one here defending Denuvo and trying to minimise other people’s opinions on it.
I won’t be replying anymore as you’re clearly not here in good faith.
I think it’s valid to point to exceptionalism in the reasoning.
Excuse racism as an analogy here; but if a homeowner complains “That young man has been loitering around that corner store all day! He’s up to no good!” then a good cop (yes, I know) should rightfully point out “So, that young man is black. To be clear, your issue is with loitering, so you also have an issue with that white boy that’s loitering around another corner store, right?” If the homeowner’s response is “I didn’t say that!!” then it suddenly becomes telling as to why they have a favorable view of one circumstance and not another, even if they’re not verbally stating “I don’t like black kids!”.
You said they’re both “bad”, but by lack of mention, it sounds like you’re not boycotting Steam’s, and if I had to guess, it’s due to effectiveness; so long as it can be circumvented, you don’t especially care, right? For the purposes of the argument, circumvention and performance are two very distinct concerns. If it can be shown that Steam DRM also affects performance, what would be your opinion then?
This is the only true thing you said. Everything else is your assumptions that you argue against as a strawman.
The arguments I’ve made here stand on their own and I’m not going to jump through hoops to try to pass your manipulative and extremely transparent purity test.
That was also the only factual assertion I made. I posited a guess afterwards, and drew potential conclusions afterwards.
You’re free to analyze my assumptions, which I label as assumptions, as incorrect, and give a further explanation of why one thing is true and another is not. But if you’re entering an argument refusing to make statements, OR supporting/negating suggested statements, that’s pretty much the definition of arguing in bad faith. Your arguments don’t “stand on their own” if you’re not open to discussion of their potential flaws.
If you don’t want to comment, just keep your hand off the Post button. No one hates you for that.
You sound like a twitter lawyer. “STRAWMAN!” - “WHATABOUTISM!”.
You never said it, however, you implied that SteamDRM is acceptable while Denuvo is fine. Which, in my book, is a contradiction if you say you’re against DRM in particular.
I’m not defending it, I’m just wondering why Denuvo leads people to not buying games but being all fine with using SteamDRM (they’re both DRM after all) or highly invasive anti-cheat. It just makes no sense to me.
That’s fine, have a nice day!