227: The greatest argument I've seen against Denuvo is that things like DSFix (and probably the unofficial VTM:B fixes/mods) wouldn't be possible if Dark Souls had used it. Because developers always release games in stellar shape. Then there are the game preservation concerns down the line, and the fact that it basically gives publishers yet another avenue to kill off old games to "encourage" people to buy newer incarnations.
I get that it's not an immediate problem and practically invisible for many players as a result, but that doesn't mean that it's harmless. Especially in the long run if it becomes so accepted that it sees greater adoption.
Well said.
Educating the consumers of now and tomorrow about the implications of DRM, and even just services that require clients to access products you own, would be a good way of making sure that Denuvo and similar don't easily gain widespread acceptance. And I guess supporting the companies that don't employ such things would help.
The optimist that I am, I think Denuvo will start to lose favour if they have to make their system more restricting.
227: Yeah. In the Game of the Millennium Super Deluxe Repackaged Edition that forces you to rebuy the game to have continued support.
Actually, I think we'd only be getting Game of The Century Editions in a few years.
JK41R4: And the ones that do will probably remove it from their games years from now anyway.
rodrolliv: Could be, or they could do as Rockstar and leave the
several DRM layers that GTA IV still has to this day.
Okay, good point, but R* probably don't care about PC gamers or their old games that much anyway.