News Publishers face 20% game revenue reduction if Denuvo DRM is cracked quickly, according to new study

[Admin]

A recently published study on the PC video games market looks at the impact that anti-piracy tech is having on the business.

Publishers face 20% game revenue reduction if Denuvo DRM is cracked quickly, according to new study : Read more

 

[Giroro]

Somebody published a paper just to tell a company's customers that they should keep dumping obscene amounts of money into perpetually re-buying a license for temporarily effective software?

But who would pay to have this paper written, and why?

 

[Alvar "Miles" Udell]

The sad thing that DRM, not massive performance hindering or game breaking bugs, is the thing that reduces game revenue for the first 3 months...

 

[rluker5]

If I knew that a game would get DRM removed and a performance increase after 3 months I might wait to buy it. Then lose interest and wait for a sale to get it. I don't think I'm alone as many would prefer to have the game without it. Most sales happen in the first 3 months and you don't want to advertise that the superior version is coming out shortly.

To keep this from happening and to make the most possible profit it seems the answer is DRM forever. Maybe just make it stick to e-cores better.

Just to be clear: I don't want DRM in my games. But a company has to think about their bottom line.

 

[JTWrenn]

Would be interesting to cross compare this with which games had a poor implementation of Denuvo causing massive performance loss. If those are in this data set I think it skews the whole issue.

 

[hotaru251]

luckily for publishers only person who did it stopped.

Honestly dont care about denuvo for month or two, but i dont think should be on games after half a yr later...there is no point.

also the results of this are pointless.
You can't find out the actual cost becasue many ppl wont buy a game even if they cant pirate it. so regardless of denuvo or crack doesnt mean someone will pay you for it regardless. (and $0 is still $0)

 

[umeng2002_2]

I wonder who studied his research. I think a European study reveal that piracy has almost no impact on sales.

 

[Math Geek]

so far this year i have "tested" around 20 games that seemed interesting to me. pretty much none are current AAA games. of those, 3 of them held my interest enough to want to play it past a day or 2 (and none of them were AAA games). i bought all 3 of them and even finished 2 of them . one has had an add-on DLC which i also purchased

without the opportunity to test out those games, i 100% assure you i'd have purchased exactly 0 games this year as i never will spend $60+ to try out a game and hope it interests me past a couple hours/days. $70+ to "pre-order" something is an even dumber idea i have no idea why actually exists.

i realize i am probably in the minority with it, but downloading it to try out for me is the same as getting a free demo from the developer. if i like it, i'll buy it, if i don't, i delete the demo and forget it existed. many games have demos on steam but rarely anything i might be interested in overall, so i get a "demo" copy elsewhere and try it out. generally if the game gets its first couple patches/updates early on and i'm still playing it, that tells me to go ahead and buy it

 

[das_stig]

It's not piracy that reduces revenue, that ship sailed years ago when it was found to be a lie and used by the industry to force through piracy laws for them by the paid for politicians, its the greedy publishers charging stupid prices for half finished buggy games and then expect us to pay for the DLC to fix these bugs and content that should be their on release, not to mention the 2nd rate console conversions.

 

[USAFRet]

I just find this mindset comical:
"This game sux so hard I will NOT pay for it. But I will play it."

If people would stop patronizing these crappy games, maybe they'd make them a bit better.

 

[Notton]

Which games were studied? or is this all speculative and a derived result?