But removing Denuvo DRM after 12 weeks ‘causes zero mean total revenue loss.’

  • istdaslol@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    9 hours ago

    I say it again, people will buy the product if they like it. They don’t know if they will like it so they get a pirated version to test it. Solution: Return of the demo disks

    • ihatetheworld@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      All I know is piracy definitely has an impact on bad games/products and if you give the consumer something worth buying, they will most definitely buy it if or when they can afford to.

      They might also recommend it to their friends or talk about it online which lead to additional sales that would not happen if they didn’t sail the high sea.

  • howrar@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    11 hours ago

    They do not have sales data, so they use two different proxies: number of reviews, and number of active players.

    I don’t see mention of how they get the number of active players. I’m assuming it’s through stats in Steam or something similar. If that’s the case, then their assumption of this number being biased towards being larger than the true number would be wrong. If you choose to both pirate and buy the game, chances are good that you’ll be playing the pirated version, and therefore would not get counted towards active players.

  • aldalire@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    12 hours ago

    From the paper (proton drive file) https://drive.proton.me/urls/Z6DPGQCZ0M#GxZ6dDb2oV5W

    The results suggest that Denuvo does protect legitimate sales to an estimated mean of 15 percent of total revenue and median of 20 percent, but there is little justification to employ Denuvo long-term (i.e. for more than three months), especially given that Denuvo can have negative technical side effects and is generally disliked by users.

    • otp@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Not everybody follows that same diagram.

      On one end of things, many people don’t care at all if a game has Denuvo.

      On the other end, many pirates won’t buy a game they pirated even if they liked playing it.

      • nivellian@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        “Many” so what’s your source for this?

        Also I have bought a bunch of games and I still pirate sometimes what are you talking.

        • Miaou
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          7 hours ago

          What’s yours? This whole “pirates are also buyers” is just a cop-out, but sure your anecdotic experience is valid proof against the more logical alternative

        • ExcessShiv@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Common sense logic kinda dictates that once people have obtained a product, they’re unlikely to go back an pay for the same product even if they liked what they got the first time. The only outlier I have seen, is with small(er) indie games where people are more likely to offer support. Someone pirating a AAA title, liking it and then buying it shortly after at full retail is pretty rare i would say.

  • stardust@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    14 hours ago

    How is that even measured when you see big budget games with DRM flop and games without DRM get crazy sales. Do consumers who pirate but are willing to pay full price for a game even that significant?

    • theshatterstone54@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Simple: it has nothing to do with DRM (unless the DRM is actively making the experience worse, which Denuvo is known to do) and everything to do with creating a good, unique and enjoyable game that doesn’t feel like a live-service-for-no-reason, microtransaction-riddled, bug-infested, alpha-quality-software-presented-as-release, cash grab, which is what most triple A studios seem to focus on creating these days.

  • Kairos@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Actual title: studios make 10/8 = 125% percent of what they normally do if they art behind malware, and gets buy it up because marketing, FOMO, etc.

  • kbal@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Did this highly scientific study contemplate the possibility that this is in part the result of people feeling like they’re more justified in turning to piracy if a game is burdened with Denuvo?

    Spoiler: It does not, so far as I can tell at first glance. It appears that the model is constructed entirely from DRM-crippled games that got cracked, and then then the estimate of how much revenue would be lost by going DRM-free from the start is extrapolated from that based on the assumption that it makes no difference. Maybe it’s true, but the acknowledgement that it “can and often does cause problems, and some developers have chosen to avoid Denuvo altogether because it had such a negative impact on how well their game would run” sort of suggests otherwise.

    https://abs.freemyip.com:84/share/_5WuM4QF — be careful following strange links you found on lemmy, but this appears to be the pdf.

  • PrivateNoob@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Modern denuvo games aren’t being cracked anymore. It only happens if the devs accidentally publish a just before launch release accidentally