Resident Evil 7 Denuvo cracked in less than 5 days

  • 70 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for dakur
Dakur

3275

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#51 Dakur
Member since 2014 • 3275 Posts

@dynamitecop said:
@cainetao11 said:
@dynamitecop said:

All this is going to do is drive developers on PC to UWP, it's very secure.

Capcom is going to see the Steam breech and reevaluate their releases while the UWP version of the game remains untouched, just like all the other games on UWP.

Untouched because of low sales numbers LOL

Yeah, because Gears of War 4, Forza Horizon 3 & Gears of War Ultimate Edition are just such low selling games lacking appeal... All of which are not cracked, can't be pirated, and do not exist outside of the UWP ecosystem, because people simply cannot crack them.

They are low selling games on PC cause PC gamers have much better things to play.

Avatar image for GhoX
GhoX

6267

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 26

User Lists: 0

#52  Edited By GhoX
Member since 2006 • 6267 Posts

@mjorh said:
@GhoX said:

I saw backlash for always online DRM when Diablo 3 first came out. Since then? Haven't heard a thing. And complaints have been in the vast minority and usually crushed by fanboys. I mean, nobody even cared about how For Honor has always online DRM as well.

Your claim that the "backlash for that kinda DRM would be so huge" is entirely baseless. I say it's much more likely that the general public will be highly accepting of always online DRM, regardless of how much it intrudes upon their consumer rights. In the end, there will only be edgy social justice warriors who still cry about DRM.

The launch matters, and it's Diablo that we're talking about here, you can get away with it when it comes to big titles but that simply cannot be applied to all games.

If it's baseless, they why they backpedaled on Hitman? then why there's a few games with Online DRM? If EA or any other big publisher had found any chance in implementing online DRM, they would've done that in a blink of an eye

About For Honor, it's an online game .... piracy is only for offline ones.

Publishers didn't release 20 DLCs in fully priced games in the blink of an eye. They did it gradually, starting with some horse armor and minor addon. Then they realised that people kinda accept that, so now we have half the games in DLCs.

Publishers didn't introduce microtransactions with gameplay impacts in the blink of an eye. They did it gradually, starting with convenience boosts and cosmetics. Then they realised that people are totally cool with that, and now we are starting to have gameplay impacting microtransactions in fully paid games (e.g. For Honor again).

Similarly, publishers won't introduce always online DRM in the blink of an eye. They will do it gradually.

For Honor will be one of the first AAA titles which a single player campaign that requires always online. Yes, it focuses on multiplayer, but as said "gradually". First we'll have multiplayer-focused games with single player components becoming always online (i.e. COD, Battlefield, etc.). Then we'll have single-player focused games with multiplayer components becoming always online (e.g. could have been Mass Effect Andromeda, if it isn't already using Denuvo). Finally we'll just straight on have pure single-player games that require always online. It will happen, but not in the blink of an eye.

Personally, I would regard myself as fairly neutral on the DRM front, so long as it does not impact me. Pragmatically, Denuvo has no chance of impacting me, contrary to always online which requires a fairly constant and stable connection. I will defend Denuvo because it's the best thing going forward. It's better than the alternatives publishers would pursue for peace of mind, and getting rid of DRM across the industry is an altogether impossible delusion.

Avatar image for Litchie
Litchie

36099

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#53 Litchie  Online
Member since 2003 • 36099 Posts

@boycie said:
@Litchie said:

Good news for those who don't want to support Capcom's crappy deals.

If you think a game is too expensive you should a) work harder to earn more money or b) wait until the game falls down to a price you are willing to pay.

It does not give you an excuse to steal it and basically stick your middle finger up at your fellow gamers who do pay for games.

Or c) Don't buy the game at all.

I fail to see how pirating it and playing it (and possibly recommend the game to others making Capcom a favor in the process) is worse than not playing it at all. "It's stealing and totally not right!!" doesn't really cut it for me. It's more right to me than Capcom taking out a part of their game and sell it a week after the game's release.

I'm not saying I pirate games or will pirate RE7, but I don't see much wrong with it when Capcom is doing what they are. I really don't want to support that behavior, and I really wish more gamers wouldn't.

Avatar image for GhoX
GhoX

6267

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 26

User Lists: 0

#54 GhoX
Member since 2006 • 6267 Posts

@Litchie said:

I fail to see how pirating it and playing it (and possibly recommend the game to others making Capcom a favor in the process) is worse than not playing it at all. "It's stealing and totally not right!!" doesn't really cut it for me. It's more right to me than Capcom taking out a part of their game and sell it a week after the game's release.

Well, and that thought process is exactly why publishers want peace of mind from good DRM, even if at a cost to legitimate consumers.

Pirates always end up hurting legitimate consumers, and ergo the industry, both short-term and long-term one way or another.

Avatar image for Litchie
Litchie

36099

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#55 Litchie  Online
Member since 2003 • 36099 Posts

@GhoX said:
@Litchie said:

I fail to see how pirating it and playing it (and possibly recommend the game to others making Capcom a favor in the process) is worse than not playing it at all. "It's stealing and totally not right!!" doesn't really cut it for me. It's more right to me than Capcom taking out a part of their game and sell it a week after the game's release.

Well, and that thought process is exactly why publishers want peace of mind from good DRM, even if at a cost to legitimate consumers.

Pirates always end up hurting legitimate consumers, and ergo the industry, both short-term and long-term one way or another.

When game makers try to block pirates (and they fail everytime they try) they hurt both the games and gamers. This is the pirates fault? Sorry, I don't agree at all. If the ones making the games sell them for a reasonable price, way more people will buy the game than what a DRM makes people buy the game. It's just all around better not bothering with expensive DRM and instead give gamers better deals making them want to buy the games more.

Witcher 3 is a good example, if you want one.

Avatar image for zeeshanhaider
zeeshanhaider

5524

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#56 zeeshanhaider
Member since 2004 • 5524 Posts

@GhoX said:
@mjorh said:
@GhoX said:

I saw backlash for always online DRM when Diablo 3 first came out. Since then? Haven't heard a thing. And complaints have been in the vast minority and usually crushed by fanboys. I mean, nobody even cared about how For Honor has always online DRM as well.

Your claim that the "backlash for that kinda DRM would be so huge" is entirely baseless. I say it's much more likely that the general public will be highly accepting of always online DRM, regardless of how much it intrudes upon their consumer rights. In the end, there will only be edgy social justice warriors who still cry about DRM.

The launch matters, and it's Diablo that we're talking about here, you can get away with it when it comes to big titles but that simply cannot be applied to all games.

If it's baseless, they why they backpedaled on Hitman? then why there's a few games with Online DRM? If EA or any other big publisher had found any chance in implementing online DRM, they would've done that in a blink of an eye

About For Honor, it's an online game .... piracy is only for offline ones.

Publishers didn't release 20 DLCs in fully priced games in the blink of an eye. They did it gradually, starting with some horse armor and minor addon. Then they realised that people kinda accept that, so now we have half the games in DLCs.

Publishers didn't introduce microtransactions with gameplay impacts in the blink of an eye. They did it gradually, starting with convenience boosts and cosmetics. Then they realised that people are totally cool with that, and now we are starting to have gameplay impacting microtransactions in fully paid games (e.g. For Honor again).

Similarly, publishers won't introduce always online DRM in the blink of an eye. They will do it gradually.

For Honor will be one of the first AAA titles which a single player campaign that requires always online. Yes, it focuses on multiplayer, but as said "gradually". First we'll have multiplayer-focused games with single player components becoming always online (i.e. COD, Battlefield, etc.). Then we'll have single-player focused games with multiplayer components becoming always online (e.g. could have been Mass Effect Andromeda, if it isn't already using Denuvo). Finally we'll just straight on have pure single-player games that require always online. It will happen, but not in the blink of an eye.

Personally, I would regard myself as fairly neutral on the DRM front, so long as it does not impact me. Pragmatically, Denuvo has no chance of impacting me, contrary to always online which requires a fairly constant and stable connection. I will defend Denuvo because it's the best thing going forward. It's better than the alternatives publishers would pursue for peace of mind, and getting rid of DRM across the industry is an altogether impossible delusion.

Ubisoft already tried it with Assassins Creed 2 back in 2009, not only was it pirated on day 1, the backlash was so huge that later they completely reverted it. I'm not saying its' impossible for publishers to do that but there will be backlash as was with Assassins Creed 2 and SimCity 4. We don't know how For Honor plays out in the coming months but what you're missing here is that this title is online only on consoles as well. Somewhat different situation.

Avatar image for cainetao11
cainetao11

38071

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 77

User Lists: 1

#57 cainetao11
Member since 2006 • 38071 Posts

@dakur said:
@dynamitecop said:
@cainetao11 said:
@dynamitecop said:

All this is going to do is drive developers on PC to UWP, it's very secure.

Capcom is going to see the Steam breech and reevaluate their releases while the UWP version of the game remains untouched, just like all the other games on UWP.

Untouched because of low sales numbers LOL

Yeah, because Gears of War 4, Forza Horizon 3 & Gears of War Ultimate Edition are just such low selling games lacking appeal... All of which are not cracked, can't be pirated, and do not exist outside of the UWP ecosystem, because people simply cannot crack them.

They are low selling games on PC cause PC gamers have much better things to play.

Your bullshit is as bad as Trump's. When Streep or DeNiro called him out, Trump tweets they are overrated actors. Two of the best in history just because he's butthurt

Here you are with a hatehard on for all things Microsoft and acting like FH3 is a mediocre game. LOL just ignore the fact that industry wide its the best received open world racer of the gen with a 91/100 meta score. You're really sad, dude.

Avatar image for dakur
Dakur

3275

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#58  Edited By Dakur
Member since 2014 • 3275 Posts

@cainetao11 said:
@dakur said:
@dynamitecop said:
@cainetao11 said:

Untouched because of low sales numbers LOL

Yeah, because Gears of War 4, Forza Horizon 3 & Gears of War Ultimate Edition are just such low selling games lacking appeal... All of which are not cracked, can't be pirated, and do not exist outside of the UWP ecosystem, because people simply cannot crack them.

They are low selling games on PC cause PC gamers have much better things to play.

Your bullshit is as bad as Trump's. When Streep or DeNiro called him out, Trump tweets they are overrated actors. Two of the best in history just because he's butthurt

Here you are with a hatehard on for all things Microsoft and acting like FH3 is a mediocre game. LOL just ignore the fact that industry wide its the best received open world racer of the gen with a 91/100 meta score. You're really sad, dude.

LOL you use the worse example ever. PC gamers have a bunch of hyper realistic racers that are not on consoles and they don't even sell close to what something like Gran Turismo sells on console. Of course Forza will struggle even if it's good. On consoles it keeps selling low in comparison to GT. And for shooters that are the other type of game M$ has exclusives of, the games on PC in those genres just shit all over them. So sorry but it's a fact that MS games are no up there and even less if they keep them locked in that stinky dungeon known as the Windows Store where no one wants to go. There's not really a lot of motivation out there to pirate those games if so few people play them there.

Avatar image for ten_pints
Ten_Pints

4072

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#59 Ten_Pints
Member since 2014 • 4072 Posts
@cainetao11 said:
@dakur said:
@dynamitecop said:
@cainetao11 said:
@dynamitecop said:

All this is going to do is drive developers on PC to UWP, it's very secure.

Capcom is going to see the Steam breech and reevaluate their releases while the UWP version of the game remains untouched, just like all the other games on UWP.

Untouched because of low sales numbers LOL

Yeah, because Gears of War 4, Forza Horizon 3 & Gears of War Ultimate Edition are just such low selling games lacking appeal... All of which are not cracked, can't be pirated, and do not exist outside of the UWP ecosystem, because people simply cannot crack them.

They are low selling games on PC cause PC gamers have much better things to play.

Your bullshit is as bad as Trump's. When Streep or DeNiro called him out, Trump tweets they are overrated actors. Two of the best in history just because he's butthurt

Here you are with a hatehard on for all things Microsoft and acting like FH3 is a mediocre game. LOL just ignore the fact that industry wide its the best received open world racer of the gen with a 91/100 meta score. You're really sad, dude.

Please, don't even go there. People are entitled to their own opinions, accept it and move on.

Avatar image for cainetao11
cainetao11

38071

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 77

User Lists: 1

#60 cainetao11
Member since 2006 • 38071 Posts

@ten_pints said:
@cainetao11 said:
@dakur said:
@dynamitecop said:
@cainetao11 said:

Untouched because of low sales numbers LOL

Yeah, because Gears of War 4, Forza Horizon 3 & Gears of War Ultimate Edition are just such low selling games lacking appeal... All of which are not cracked, can't be pirated, and do not exist outside of the UWP ecosystem, because people simply cannot crack them.

They are low selling games on PC cause PC gamers have much better things to play.

Your bullshit is as bad as Trump's. When Streep or DeNiro called him out, Trump tweets they are overrated actors. Two of the best in history just because he's butthurt

Here you are with a hatehard on for all things Microsoft and acting like FH3 is a mediocre game. LOL just ignore the fact that industry wide its the best received open world racer of the gen with a 91/100 meta score. You're really sad, dude.

Please, don't even go there. People are entitled to their own opinions, accept it and move on.

Take your own advice and don't read my posts. Just move on

Avatar image for aigis
aigis

7355

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 43

User Lists: 0

#61 aigis
Member since 2015 • 7355 Posts

@hammerthrust said:

I guess that's typical for the Resident Evil series. I swear, that series is the town slut of the video game community, isn't it? It's so heavily marketed and so widely available!

What? This doesnt really have that much to do with Resident Evil (other than maybe someone can pirate it now) and more with Denuvo being pointless

Avatar image for GhoX
GhoX

6267

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 26

User Lists: 0

#62  Edited By GhoX
Member since 2006 • 6267 Posts

@Litchie said:
@GhoX said:
@Litchie said:

I fail to see how pirating it and playing it (and possibly recommend the game to others making Capcom a favor in the process) is worse than not playing it at all. "It's stealing and totally not right!!" doesn't really cut it for me. It's more right to me than Capcom taking out a part of their game and sell it a week after the game's release.

Well, and that thought process is exactly why publishers want peace of mind from good DRM, even if at a cost to legitimate consumers.

Pirates always end up hurting legitimate consumers, and ergo the industry, both short-term and long-term one way or another.

When game makers try to block pirates (and they fail everytime they try) they hurt both the games and gamers. This is the pirates fault? Sorry, I don't agree at all. If the ones making the games sell them for a reasonable price, way more people will buy the game than what a DRM makes people buy the game. It's just all around better not bothering with expensive DRM and instead give gamers better deals making them want to buy the games more.

Witcher 3 is a good example, if you want one.

If the police runs down a member of public while chasing a boy racer, I would place more blame on the boy racer than on the police (albeit depending on the circumstances may not be entirely blameless).

Gaming is a luxury. It's not a necessity and should therefore not need to be priced like necessities. If you don't agree with the price, then don't buy. Pirating a non-necessity just because you don't agree with the price or can't afford doesn't make it right.

Avatar image for GhoX
GhoX

6267

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 26

User Lists: 0

#63 GhoX
Member since 2006 • 6267 Posts

@zeeshanhaider said:
@GhoX said:

Publishers didn't release 20 DLCs in fully priced games in the blink of an eye. They did it gradually, starting with some horse armor and minor addon. Then they realised that people kinda accept that, so now we have half the games in DLCs.

Publishers didn't introduce microtransactions with gameplay impacts in the blink of an eye. They did it gradually, starting with convenience boosts and cosmetics. Then they realised that people are totally cool with that, and now we are starting to have gameplay impacting microtransactions in fully paid games (e.g. For Honor again).

Similarly, publishers won't introduce always online DRM in the blink of an eye. They will do it gradually.

For Honor will be one of the first AAA titles which a single player campaign that requires always online. Yes, it focuses on multiplayer, but as said "gradually". First we'll have multiplayer-focused games with single player components becoming always online (i.e. COD, Battlefield, etc.). Then we'll have single-player focused games with multiplayer components becoming always online (e.g. could have been Mass Effect Andromeda, if it isn't already using Denuvo). Finally we'll just straight on have pure single-player games that require always online. It will happen, but not in the blink of an eye.

Personally, I would regard myself as fairly neutral on the DRM front, so long as it does not impact me. Pragmatically, Denuvo has no chance of impacting me, contrary to always online which requires a fairly constant and stable connection. I will defend Denuvo because it's the best thing going forward. It's better than the alternatives publishers would pursue for peace of mind, and getting rid of DRM across the industry is an altogether impossible delusion.

Ubisoft already tried it with Assassins Creed 2 back in 2009, not only was it pirated on day 1, the backlash was so huge that later they completely reverted it. I'm not saying its' impossible for publishers to do that but there will be backlash as was with Assassins Creed 2 and SimCity 4. We don't know how For Honor plays out in the coming months but what you're missing here is that this title is online only on consoles as well. Somewhat different situation.

That was years ago. Back then people also gave strong backlashes to microtransactions of any form in fully priced games; yet this is no longer the case.

Do you truly believe that things will turn out the same? Again, "gradual" means gradual. It may take months, or it may take years, but the trend is already there and the story is simply that most consumers don't care. The vocal ones on forums will be loud, but at the end of the day if people continue to vote with their wallets words will mean little to game publishers.

Avatar image for mjorh
mjorh

6749

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#64  Edited By mjorh
Member since 2011 • 6749 Posts

@GhoX said:
@mjorh said:
@GhoX said:

I saw backlash for always online DRM when Diablo 3 first came out. Since then? Haven't heard a thing. And complaints have been in the vast minority and usually crushed by fanboys. I mean, nobody even cared about how For Honor has always online DRM as well.

Your claim that the "backlash for that kinda DRM would be so huge" is entirely baseless. I say it's much more likely that the general public will be highly accepting of always online DRM, regardless of how much it intrudes upon their consumer rights. In the end, there will only be edgy social justice warriors who still cry about DRM.

The launch matters, and it's Diablo that we're talking about here, you can get away with it when it comes to big titles but that simply cannot be applied to all games.

If it's baseless, they why they backpedaled on Hitman? then why there's a few games with Online DRM? If EA or any other big publisher had found any chance in implementing online DRM, they would've done that in a blink of an eye

About For Honor, it's an online game .... piracy is only for offline ones.

Publishers didn't release 20 DLCs in fully priced games in the blink of an eye. They did it gradually, starting with some horse armor and minor addon. Then they realised that people kinda accept that, so now we have half the games in DLCs.

Publishers didn't introduce microtransactions with gameplay impacts in the blink of an eye. They did it gradually, starting with convenience boosts and cosmetics. Then they realised that people are totally cool with that, and now we are starting to have gameplay impacting microtransactions in fully paid games (e.g. For Honor again).

Similarly, publishers won't introduce always online DRM in the blink of an eye. They will do it gradually.

For Honor will be one of the first AAA titles which a single player campaign that requires always online. Yes, it focuses on multiplayer, but as said "gradually". First we'll have multiplayer-focused games with single player components becoming always online (i.e. COD, Battlefield, etc.). Then we'll have single-player focused games with multiplayer components becoming always online (e.g. could have been Mass Effect Andromeda, if it isn't already using Denuvo). Finally we'll just straight on have pure single-player games that require always online. It will happen, but not in the blink of an eye.

Personally, I would regard myself as fairly neutral on the DRM front, so long as it does not impact me. Pragmatically, Denuvo has no chance of impacting me, contrary to always online which requires a fairly constant and stable connection. I will defend Denuvo because it's the best thing going forward. It's better than the alternatives publishers would pursue for peace of mind, and getting rid of DRM across the industry is an altogether impossible delusion.

If you don't do them right, there will be backlash. Like the way Payday 2 handled the microtransactions, but take a look at Rainbow Six Siege, it has DLCs, it has Season Pass but everybody's happy , why? because they do it right.

They can't do it gradually, they can't even get close to it, For Honor is an Online game hence not relevant here and let's be honest, nobody cares about its Single player aspect. My point is, you will never ever see a fully fledged single player game to have Online DRM, period.

That's where you're wrong, you're like "it doesn't matter to me because it doesn't affect me" , it does affect some ppl as i showed in the picture hence it ain't good.

I can understand your view here but don't worry, they wouldn't dare to implement Online DRM in a single-player game.

My first solution to the whole piracy issue is that they should offer Demos, as i know some ppl who only pirate a game to see if it's good, so offering a Demo would go a long way. my second solution is to provide a local store in all countries so the games can be bought with the local currency hence way cheaper ! Here, in Iran, when you buy a 60$ game, you're actually giving away one third of your monthly income! It is just impossible to buy the product (especially when you're a teenager, good luck asking your dad to give one-third of his money to you), and this is the case in all of the third-world countries. Personally, i've changed my region on Steam so i can buy games cheaper (which is not possible on Origin or Uplay or Windows Store games, gotta wait for some price drop or go with Nvidia bundles...which i'm hoping Nvidia offers one for Mass Effect Andromeda otherwise i have to pay 60$ which is basically half of my income lol), yeah it is an illegal thing to do but it's fair...but majority of ppl here don't know about this and it's risky, you may get banned, hence resorting to Piracy (or using websites like this http://denuvogames.ru/?lang=en) ....Overall, my point is, consider the circumestances, it's not as simple as ppl in first-world countries think it is, it's a significant financial problem ...you can't get around that by implementing DRM.

And read this article for further insight:

http://www.pcgamer.com/the-state-of-pc-piracy-in-2016/

In Bulgaria, a new game frequently costs almost a third of a minimum wage earner’s monthly income.

Avatar image for Gatygun
Gatygun

2709

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#65  Edited By Gatygun
Member since 2010 • 2709 Posts

@jhonMalcovich said:

Good news for some, bad new for the others.

The bad part is that now developers may stop releasing games on PC simultaneously with the consoles.

Resident Evil sold 2.5M copies. I wonder if that will be enough for Capcom in order not to blame PC for lost sales. Even though I think their game is tremendously overpriced for what it offers.

Source

Single player only games never sell well really on PC. Even if it wouldn't be cracked the sales would be abysmal on pc.

uwp nobody on pc enviroment gives 2 cents about microsoft shop, never will be. They burned these bridges to much really over and over again. uwp is there next fail solution.

The protection they use pushes away a lot of knowledged pc users for buying the game. Nobody wants drm's on there pc games. It's not 00's anymore.

Avatar image for howmakewood
Howmakewood

7836

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#66  Edited By Howmakewood
Member since 2015 • 7836 Posts

@Gatygun: Witcher, EOS, Fallout, Dark souls etc all sell well on PC, so can't really say all single player

Avatar image for ShepardCommandr
ShepardCommandr

4939

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#67 ShepardCommandr
Member since 2013 • 4939 Posts

denuvo=no buy

i'd rather get the inferior console version on a discount

Avatar image for Gatygun
Gatygun

2709

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#68  Edited By Gatygun
Member since 2010 • 2709 Posts

@howmakewood said:

@Gatygun: Witcher, EOS, Fallout, Dark souls etc all sell well on PC, so can't really say all single player

Witcher / fallout are big on PC because they are open world games which are a joy for modders. Also witcher is a bit more special a visual bar pushers which a lot of people on PC like and it got heavily promoted by free give anyways which they also count as sales ( nvidia cards etc ). And they sold a lot of those gpu's.

Fallout is from that company that also makes skyrim, it's massive on pc.

Dark soul has multiplayer features it's not a single player game even while you can play it single player. It still makes sense to buy a multiplayer version of it.

If you get games that are a pure single player event, sales will tank hard on PC. DRM makes it even worse. As single player games are already dead for over a decade on pc it's more console food as the typically yield behind.

That's why a lot of single player games like city builders implant other online features to make people buy into it.

The last DRM city builder totally flopped hard ( some sim city i think ), because of it's absolute garbage drm. While another city builder was a massive success. As they provided what people wanted.

Avatar image for KungfuKitten
KungfuKitten

27389

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#69  Edited By KungfuKitten
Member since 2006 • 27389 Posts
@hammerthrust said:

I guess that's typical for the Resident Evil series. I swear, that series is the town slut of the video game community, isn't it? It's so heavily marketed and so widely available!

lol that analogy. More like a cracked whore.

Avatar image for leandrro
leandrro

1644

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: -2

User Lists: 0

#70 leandrro
Member since 2007 • 1644 Posts

i havent seen a single bad game on denuvo with good sales, and also havent seen a single good game without denuvo and bad sales

denuvo is irrelevant for sales