Toggle sidebar
Front-page

Denuvo update blocks hypervisor bypass used to crack PC games

Denuvo update blocks hypervisor bypass used to crack PC games

Denuvo appears to have been updated and the hypervisor bypass that has been used to crack dozens of games no longer works if recent reports are to be believed.

The reports state that Star Wars: Galactic Racer remains uncracked several days after launch, suggesting the game ships with the latest edition of the DRM software built to close the loophole that previously cracked Denuvo-secured games wide-open.

Once again, this appears to be causing issues for legitimate players as Steam reviews are reporting issues with the game from crashing outright on startup to other hiccups once in game.

The ongoing lawsuit against hacker voices38 - the anonymous individual involved in the Denuvo cracking situation continues, with Denuvo having filed subpoenas against Discord, Reddit, Valve, and Microsoft to try and unmask and help identify them across the platforms.

:arrow: Source
 
  • Like
  • Angry
  • Sad
Reactions: yoshi_nysa, impeeza, ChibiMofo and 15 others
Click to expand...
Lop1 said:
Well, it is a problem that people are choosing to just not buy a thing, whatever reason they have. If nobody was paying, nobody would make anything. That is the logical conclusion of it.

DRMs like this however, are certainly not a solution, especially when those who don't pay a cent, get measurably better and simpler experience. I imagine practices like this, are a net negative on sales, not a positive.
Post automatically merged:


Nobody contested that. Point is simply mislabeling to make pirating worse in the eyes of common folk, than it actually is.

No different from the moral outrage about violence in video games all those years ago on that front, where religious zealots were trying to make people believe, if your children played Mortal Kombat, that they would turn into violent criminals.
Click to expand...
My question being to that would be how could these corperations make any better sequals if they considered piracy as not theft and just handed it out to everyone stating yeah you can just pirate it.
 
K3Nv4 said:
My question being to that would be how could these corperations make any better sequals if they considered piracy as not theft and just handed it out to everyone stating yeah you can just pirate it.
Click to expand...
I don't see the point of that question. Piracy not being theft, does not prevent them from putting measures against it. Piracy itself has been made illegal decades ago, with DMCA, DRMs have existed for a bit less than that.

From what I can tell, you are arguing from the point of the logical conclusion of piracy being the default and even legal way of obtaining media that is currently sold, but nobody is advocating for that, nor would it ever happen. People are willing to pay for stuff they find worth the money, if they have the means to.

Besides that, the only thing I had contested and am against is calling piracy something that it isn't and cannot be, unless we severely twist what the word 'theft' means.

The only thing from a legal framework, where piracy imo, should be completely legal, is in cases of totally abandoned and officially inaccessible media. But that wouldn't be piracy anymore obviously, since by law, copies would be completely free to be made and distributed. I am going off topic there, just wanted to air that thought out, as something that would be incredibly positive from a standpoint of media preservation.
 
Lop1 said:
I don't see the point of that question. Piracy not being theft, does not prevent them from putting measures against it. Piracy itself has been made illegal decades ago, with DMCA, DRMs have existed for a bit less than that.

From what I can tell, you are arguing from the point of the logical conclusion of piracy being the default and even legal way of obtaining media that is currently sold, but nobody is advocating for that, nor would it ever happen. People are willing to pay for stuff they find worth the money, if they have the means to.

Besides that, the only thing I had contested and am against is calling piracy something that it isn't and cannot be, unless we severely twist what the word 'theft' means.

The only thing from a legal framework, where piracy imo, should be completely legal, is in cases of totally abandoned and officially inaccessible media. But that wouldn't be piracy anymore obviously, since by law, copies would be completely free to be made and distributed. I am going off topic there, just wanted to air that thought out, as something that would be incredibly positive from a standpoint of media preservation.
Click to expand...
I do agree after some time to where they are not making any money it should be considered freeware and uploaded at any place people choose to share it. But this is the main issue with why they want to go after people like voices38 because he is finding ways past protection that is causing money losses from current titles. This is where it could fall under theft.
 
K3Nv4 said:
I do agree after some time to where they are not making any money it should be considered freeware and uploaded at any place people choose to share it. But this is the main issue with why they want to go after people like voices38 because he is finding ways past protection that is causing money losses from current titles. This is where it could fall under theft.
Click to expand...
As I said already, it's not theft, but it is still illegal, just under different naming and framework.

As for the lawsuit against voices, it's not even video game publishers who are trying to get him either, but Irdeto itself, who are providing Denuvo to publishers. Ig they could argue a loss, due to voices making their product less appealing to publishers and devs and if they stated that was the reason that they didn't employ their services........ig it could work? I am not entirely sure what angle Irdeto is going for, but doesn't matter much to us either way.

As for piracy itself being a loss of sales......hard to prove tbh. You can easily argue that those that pirate, would not have bought the game in the first place, or that mere inclusion of aggressive DRMs like this, made people NOT purchase the title at all, because it's objectively an inferior product to a pirated copy.

Then there is that EU study, I mentioned in one of the posts above. It's a really hard thing to really prove.

But such a thing is unlikely to be tested in court, due to sheer uncertainty of it, nor it's really what should we be concerned with at all.
 
When did pirates stopped being open about wanting free games and instead try to find a billion excuses to do so?
 

Site & Scene News

New Hot Discussed User Submitted

Go to forum More news

Popular threads in this forum