Civ7 now includes Denuvo

[Leyrann]

I mean, like that it's ok. ( it's not really, bc I still use XP and WIN 7 PCs as well, and I like those machines to keep working... not having to rely on Microsoft nor Internet... but , move on..)

That's a bad idea no matter what. XP, and I think also Windows 7, no longer receive updates, and as a result any exploits (that might allow viruses to enter, for example) won't get patched. This means that it's very easy for hackers to create a virus for those operating systems which will remain useful forever (rather than having to fight a constant battle with Microsoft's defenses), which in turn means it's very easy for your computer to get infected. You should never connect to the internet for any reason with a computer that runs an operating system which doesn't receive updates anymore, until you've updated the computer to run a newer operating system. No exceptions.

5 activation in 24 hour limit means I can install the game 5 times over if it happens I have or want to but have to wait 24 between re-install (my PC might broke or something and I am forced to, e.g.) if I need to do it a 6th time or is it a 5 machines limit where they keep a record of your HW token and after 5 install you are blocked from further installs? NOT clear...

OR I can only start the GAME 5 TIMES FROM 5 different machines in a 24h time span ( SO I can not Multiplay Hotseat in my home if I have 10 different PC's - OK I run a Internet cafè kinda home, none of your business - kind of scenario prevention ) ???? But I can Start a game with 10 human players and Stream my PC to 9 other friends if that's the case right????
Oh, now everybody sees everybody turns and needs to obfuscate with OBS??? I mean what is it trying to prevent this tamper thing??? Selling my copy to a friend??? Why would I want to risk my Steam account on that??? I dont get it...

5 within 24 hours means exactly what it says. You can install it on different machines up to five times in 24 hours. Then, once the 24 hours have expired, you can once again install it on up to five different machines in 24 hours. Etc. So theoretically, in a month you could install it on some 150 different machines.

The reason for this measure is that it's simultaneously a high enough number that it's extremely unlikely, bordering on impossible, for a regular user to run into the restriction, but low enough that it's not feasible to distribute a pirated copy so long as that copy is unable to convince Denuvo that it's not copied from the legal copy of the game that it has actually been copied from (which is where pirated games come from).

 

[Vincent_lacruz]

It's not a computer, it's a virus. Second name Blue screen of death. It's name is Microsoft and there's nothing I can do. DVD is original and that makes absolutely zero difference to them.
Civ VII could ship Physical with Pre-Order. Zero Denuvo. Just insert your CD and enter code. Old School Anti-piracy. Everyone Happy.

Moderator Action: Inappropriate content removed and warning given --NZ
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

View attachment 703371

Except you don't have any cd/dvd player on recent laptops...

 

[Lazy sweeper]

That's a bad idea no matter what. XP, and I think also Windows 7, no longer receive updates, and as a result any exploits (that might allow viruses to enter, for example) won't get patched. This means that it's very easy for hackers to create a virus for those operating systems which will remain useful forever (rather than having to fight a constant battle with Microsoft's defenses), which in turn means it's very easy for your computer to get infected. You should never connect to the internet for any reason with a computer that runs an operating system which doesn't receive updates anymore, until you've updated the computer to run a newer operating system. No exceptions.



5 within 24 hours means exactly what it says. You can install it on different machines up to five times in 24 hours. Then, once the 24 hours have expired, you can once again install it on up to five different machines in 24 hours. Etc. So theoretically, in a month you could install it on some 150 different machines.

The reason for this measure is that it's simultaneously a high enough number that it's extremely unlikely, bordering on impossible, for a regular user to run into the restriction, but low enough that it's not feasible to distribute a pirated copy so long as that copy is unable to convince Denuvo that it's not copied from the legal copy of the game that it has actually been copied from (which is where pirated games come from).

Yes, I was exxagerating the issue to portray the possible causes for this measure.
But my old PC with load of Viruses, dont connect to the Internet, has DVD player, and it has ALL my games from 1998 up untill 20016, and it still can
run loads of INDI games, with a q6600 4gb ram. and an Invidia480Gt 1Gb Vram
All of my Civ games on Disc, 3 and 4, and 5, run with all possible mods on that machine, and they never crash.
on My new Win 10 PC with 32gb ram, radeon 580 8gb Vram, sometime Steam civ 4 and 5, do occasionally crash. I bought them twice.

Idem with my old Music softwares and old Audio card no longer supported.
Sometime the system crash, bc Microsoft has decided the licence is no longer valid. So Viruses moved in, even if my Win 7 DVD is original. Microsoft decide the HW changed and I'm not buying a new licence. Anyway.
I can see me in the future with my now valid WIN 10 copy that one day my PC SSD might die or something happen, and then I have to buy a new Win 10 Licence, but it might not be available, not only that, I will lose all XBOX exclusive I got from the Microsoft store on my current PC...
and I have to install win 11... or... lose all of my games from 2016 to... the moment of truth... and then I will have another PC that I dont want to go on the Internet,
but perfectly capable of playing all games I got on Steam since 2016 ( Or since Civ V Fake DVD with a Steam code on it). Why even selling the Physical DVD if there is only a generic Steam link on the DVD and the actual codi is printed on the back of the Manual??
Whan I said, just print a key on a CD, I was being sarcastic... bc it was already ditched with the Civ V dvd... Srly, what was the point of an empty dvd back then???

I'm exxagerating scenarios here, I would still buy modern games, even with Denuvo.
Still there are plenty of examples of professional softwares that do all the anti-piracy stuff on their own launcher, without external companies.
Many VST devs use a version of Key verification launcher that is standard for everyone bc too small to justify their own launcher,
and in some ways, this key-launcer ven survived some software houses death, preventing the VSTs to go un-playable.
Others shipped a code on a USb stick instead of a CD anyway, bc many VSTs would get cracked with only this external key verification launcher...
I wouldnt trust Denuvo if ti was me in the devs team to do the choice. I would get a better solution. Bc Its not a small INDIE company we are talking...
A CD is cheaper than a USb key, but nowadays no laptops has a CD player, but all has Usb. Even the Switch I believe has a USb port. Or a micro SD.
Some allows more than one licence also, specifically for the case that many Audio producers have old rigs that DO not go on the Internet. And still ship a Usb key anyway.
Even the USb was ditched once Internet was everywhere, to just authorize this or that machine, and even allow to go offline forever after the first installation with Internet access.
Same way Steam works now. (except the two - three rigs licences part)
It shouldnt be so difficult to get a valid alternative that can work on the long run for everyone.
Firaxis own launcher is more than enough for what I heard and read for replicating the Denuvo jobif it only needs to couples some metas... its overkill to me
an added layer beyond that of a good launcher overhaul...

 

[Riconatic]

Firaxis own launcher is more than enough for what I heard and read for replicating the Denuvo jobif it only needs to couples some metas... its overkill to me
an added layer beyond that of a good launcher overhaul...

Firaxis does not have any launcher. Civilization 6 had 2k launcher which was removed recently.

Civilization 7 will not have 2k launcher.

2k launcher and denuvo do not even remotely do anything same. They are totally differrent purposes.

 

[Quintillus]

That's a bad idea no matter what. XP, and I think also Windows 7, no longer receive updates, and as a result any exploits (that might allow viruses to enter, for example) won't get patched. This means that it's very easy for hackers to create a virus for those operating systems which will remain useful forever (rather than having to fight a constant battle with Microsoft's defenses), which in turn means it's very easy for your computer to get infected. You should never connect to the internet for any reason with a computer that runs an operating system which doesn't receive updates anymore, until you've updated the computer to run a newer operating system. No exceptions.

I'd analogize it to driving a car from 1960 that doesn't have any modern safety features or airbags or a crumple zone. Drive recklessly with it and you'll get hurt, and more so than you would in a modern car. But drive cautiously and avoid areas that have a high risk of an accident, and it's unlikely that the car will burst into flames, even if it's a Ford Pinto.

On the other hand, if you make poor decisions, you'll wind up with viruses even on fully-patched systems. That's why social engineering is such a big factor in malware. If someone opens the gates to the castle, it doesn't really matter whether there were gates themselves were secure or not, and it's often easier to find someone who will open the gates than it is to find gates with open design flaws, even when the latter are out there at some locations.

Which is to say I don't recommend running outdated operating systems, and anyone who says they have "an old PC with loads of viruses" has made a few mistakes along the way, but there's also a lot of FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Distrust) about it.

----

As for the Denuvo arguments on this page? "I have to reinstall Windows every week because I have a zillion viruses" is perhaps the worst anti-Denuvo argument I've heard. There have been DRM systems that were overly-restrictive in terms of install limits. I remember one of the Trackmania games had a 5-install overall limit, which was unlikely to be a problem in the first year or two but if you wanted to revisit it several times over a decade, could eventually become a problem. But that isn't the case here, and even if you were literally reinstalling Windows weekly, as I understand it that would not be a problem for playing Civ VII.

But if I had to reinstall Windows every week? I'd throw that computer out the window and build a new one. What was that Civ4 tech quote - "Never trust a computer you can't throw out the window."? By Steve Wozniak?

I'd prefer that Denuvo not be included, and I've yet to buy a game with it, so I'll have a decision to make. But flimsy arguments aren't going to change any minds.

 

[GIO888]

EVEN if its a Ford Pinto?

 

[KayAU]

The 5 activations per 24 hours limitation should not be much of an issue. If I'm reinstalling that frequently, I probably have other problems to worry about. The repeated online checks I may have a problem with though. While in most cases, I am always online, if this prevents me from playing the game just once, I am going to be very annoyed.

In any case, based on past experiences I remain sceptical of this type of DRM. Most companies seem to do very well without it, and it is not clear to me that it's useful. Perhaps the DRM will coerce some pirates to buy the game, but it is not clear that it is a high number. On the other hand, it will certainly antagonise some customers.

 

[Gedemon]

In any case, based on past experiences I remain sceptical of this type of DRM. Most companies seem to do very well without it, and it is not clear to me that it's useful. Perhaps the DRM will coerce some pirates to buy the game, but it is not clear that it is a high number. On the other hand, it will certainly antagonise some customers.

IMO including this kind of protection is not to guarantee more sales, it's to reassure the shareholders that you're protecting the company products from piracy, I mean what they believe may be more important than the difference in sales, even if the sales were to be negatively affected by the controversial decision, which can't be proven anyway.

 

[bladex1200]

IMO including this kind of protection is not to guarantee more sales, it's to reassure the shareholders that you're protecting the company products from piracy, I mean what they believe may be more important than the difference in sales, even if the sales were to be negatively affected by the controversial decision, which can't be proven anyway.

This is why I think raising a fuss is necessary. If shareholders aren't afraid of negative sales impact (whether that sales impact is realized or not), they obviously would prefer stricter anti-piracy measures over less-strict anti-piracy measures. It's the same logic with DLC and microtransactions. Why are they so prevalent and headache-inducing in many modern games? Because sales figures and general apathy towards the practices (gamers still buy the games and even still buy the DLC and microtransaction items even if they complain about them) has convinced shareholders of major game companies that these features are perfectly-acceptable to put into their products, and obviously they're desirable to put in because they are perceived to increase revenue.

 

[pokiehl]

It's strange to me that people keep repeating this idea that "Denuvo doesn't help sales" as a fact, when it's far from established.

It's all purely speculative based on whatever apparent logic people can come up with.

None of us know the internal research or data that publishers have, but my bet is that companies don't want to spend literally hundreds of thousands of dollars on a "guess" or to placate shareholders or any thing else other than something that is likely to pay off.

 

[bladex1200]

my bet is that companies don't want to spend literally hundreds of thousands of dollars on a "guess" or to placate shareholders or any thing else other than something that is likely to pay off.

Tech companies do this all the time, it's literally what the AI buzz was about recently (and still is about, a lot of companies who suffered during the AI bubble are convinced that they just "haven't found the correct strategy" for customer implementation yet). That's tangential, of course, Denuvo is a long-standing anti-DRM product whereas AI is speculative, but the impact of anti-piracy measures is hard to quantify in-general so it's hard to know if these measures are effective or simply being implemented as FOMO ("oh damn sales are lower than expected, we regret not putting in anti-piracy measures!" independent of if that is truly the reason)

 

[Kwami]

It's strange to me that people keep repeating this idea that "Denuvo doesn't help sales" as a fact, when it's far from established.

It's all purely speculative based on whatever apparent logic people can come up with.

None of us know the internal research or data that publishers have, but my bet is that companies don't want to spend literally hundreds of thousands of dollars on a "guess" or to placate shareholders or any thing else other than something that is likely to pay off.

It's not pure speculation. Companies continued to use all forms of ineffective DRM in the past (e.g. keys, SecuROM) because it placated management and shareholders.

We don't know if Denuvo increases sales, harms sales, or has little overall effect. But we do know that companies have previously made many poor decisions with regards to DRM.

 

[pokiehl]

We don't know if Denuvo increases sales, harms sales, or has little overall effect. But we do know that companies have previously made many poor decisions with regards to DRM

It is pure speculation because there’s no evidence, no control example, and no data behind it because most sales figures are not public.

If your position is that is hard to know, then it’s hard to know—you can’t have it both ways and also say that Denuvo definitively has been proven to hurt sales in various cases.

 

[Kwami]

It is pure speculation because there’s no evidence, no control example, and no data behind it because most sales figures are not public.

If your position is that is hard to know, then it’s hard to know—you can’t have it both ways and also say that Denuvo definitively has been proven to hurt sales in various cases.

And you, likewise, can't claim that Denuvo probably improves sales because otherwise companies wouldn't pay for it.

 

[TreVor_ish]

We should repeat that, Denuvo has 0 benefit for customers.
We have plenty of evidence of it having a negative impact on games, whether it being bad implemented or not.

 

[pokiehl]

We should repeat that, Denuvo has 0 benefit for customers.
We have plenty of evidence of it having a negative impact on games, whether it being bad implemented or not.

I think the benefit is that the integrity of my purchase is protected. I also feel good that the hard work of the developers is being fairly paid for. This will help ensure continued support for the product, which I as the consumer want to see.

If you purchase a product that others are easily stealing for free, it’s simply unfair to the legitimate buyer and unfair to the creators.

 

[TreVor_ish]

I think the benefit is that the integrity of my purchase is protected. I also feel good that the hard work of the developers is being fairly paid for. This will help ensure continued support for the product, which I as the consumer want to see.

If you purchase a product that others are easily stealing for free, it’s simply unfair to the legitimate buyer and unfair to the creators.

All this based on hopes.
While I could not continue my single player campaign, because I bough a game with Denuvo and didn't have broadband on my laptop. 0 protection there.
I was unable to play my other game with Denuvo, because I made too many changes in my software. 0 protection there.
Employment contracts are two ways streets. This topic is very volatile in many industries.
Plenty of games, that become financial success, despite 0 DRM. Maybe pirates are not stealing from Hello Games as an example, on purpose. I would argue, that gamers in general are more willing to pay for a good game.

 

[bladex1200]

I also feel good that the hard work of the developers is being fairly paid for. This will help ensure continued support for the product, which I as the consumer want to see.

It's arguable that DLC does that more than copy-protection, since it provides a reliable long-term revenue stream. This is why most large game companies offer DLC and season passes for games nowadays. I'm perfectly happy with this model TBQH, as someone with money, I'm not against Denuvo on the basis of being a cheapskate (buying all the Stellaris DLC is a testament to that lol). I just hate DRM software on-principle as opposed to other forms of copy-protection that are independent of the game files.

I think the benefit is that the integrity of my purchase is protected.

If you purchase a product that others are easily stealing for free, it’s simply unfair to the legitimate buyer and unfair to the creators.

It's unfair to the creators; I fail to see how it's unfair to the legitimate buyer. That implies the legitimate buyer would not want to benefit the creators if they were given the option of receiving a product for free. Additionally, the legitimate buyer is given reliable updates, reliable access to reinstall the game across devices (vs a pirate might lose access to their copy if their torrent seed or favorite piracy site goes down), access to multiplayer, etc, plenty of features are unavailable to pirates even without Denuvo copy protection. As a former pirate (back in middle school and early HS when my parents wouldn't buy me video games), I bought copies of all my favorite games once I started making money.

 

[pokiehl]

As a former pirate (back in middle school and early HS when my parents wouldn't buy me video games), I bought copies of all my favorite games once I started making money.

I’ll take you at your word here, but there’s a pervasive notion that many pirates are simply unable to afford the games and come back and buy them as some sort of goodwill gesture later on.

This notion is bunk, by-and-large. And in any case, this type of piracy where folks supposedly back to buy later still deprives the developers and publishers of money. Games come down in price over time and go on larger and larger sales, and piracy prevented earlier purchases which generate the lion’s share of total revenue. There is also the time value of money.

These later purchases, while better than nothing, don’t absolve pirates of the initial theft.

 

[bladex1200]

I’ll take you at your word here, but there’s a pervasive notion that many pirates are simply unable to afford the games and come back and buy them as some sort of goodwill gesture later on.

This notion is bunk, by-and-large. And in any case, this type of piracy where folks supposedly back to buy later still deprives the developers and publishers of money. Games come down in price over time and go on larger and larger sales, and piracy prevented earlier purchases which generate the lion’s share of total revenue. There is also the time value of money.

These later purchases, while better than nothing, don’t absolve pirates of the initial theft.

I mean that's totally fair, that's why on-principle I won't buy things with Denuvo until it's either removed or they're heavily discounted. Any revenue they might have gained from having Denuvo I hope to do my part in cancelling out until it's discounted (at which point, copy protection is arguably moot since they've already lost my theoretical income from buying it earlier)