• 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
      3
      ·
      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.

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

      • AdmiralShat@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Denuvo has an impact on performance for many games, so they artificially inflated the performance, and some people don’t buy games with Denuvo on principle, many reviewers will note that in their video.

            • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Imagine being so dumb you think that correctly pointing out when something isn’t false advertising is “corporate shilling” 😂

              • Mushroomm@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                You’re arguing over semantics. Legally it’s not false advertising but it effectively is. You’re both talking past each other but only one of you is being stubborn for the sake of it. I’d have little patience for you too.

  • 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 $.