Profile of SturmtigerCobra

https://www.pcgamesn.com/borderlands-3/denuvo
The release of Borderlands 3 is impending, and its PC deployment has brought along no shortage of controversy. It’ll be a timed exclusive to the Epic Games store, and now we know Borderlands 3 will make use of that most derided DRM solution: Denuvo anti-tamper.

In a recent set of store page redesigns, the Epic store’s Borderlands 3 landing has been updated to mention that it “incorporates 3rd-party DRM: Denuvo anti-tamper.” Users on the PC Gaming subreddit quickly noted the addition (via VG247). At a minimum, you can expect this to mean that future Epic store releases with extra DRM will tell you as much on the store page.

Denuvo’s not foolproof, but it has proven effective in keeping many 2019 releases from being torrented for months at a time – though some versions of the software have still been cracked very quickly. The Epic store’s internal, Steam-like DRM is pretty light, and many games will run just fine without the launcher even being installed.

DRM measures are typically most focused on protecting a game from piracy during the early days of its launch. Some triple-A titles have seen fit to remove Denuvo in a patch some time after release, like Hitman 2 and Rage 2.

glowpipe
Needless to say. This was discovered early in the crackwatch comment section. A lot of people waiting for the crack did just this. Which i think is kinda moronic. Giving randy even more sales to boast about. No way he reports sales and remove all the refunds

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmcumeds/1846/184606.htm
75.Much of the evidence that we received from gamers critiqued the loot box mechanics in Electronic Arts’s FIFA series. In the game’s ‘Ultimate Team’ mode, players build their own football team by buying virtual ‘packs’ containing a randomised selection of footballers. To purchase these packs, players use ‘coins’ that are earned in the game and ‘points’ purchased for real-world money. In 2016, EA’s CFO Blake Jorgensen told investors that the Ultimate Team mode accounted for roughly half of the $1.3 billion the company makes from extra digital content—that is equivalent to $650 million in annual revenue, in addition to that generated by units sales of the full games.143

76.Electronic Arts releases a new game in the FIFA series every year. However, with each new release, players’ teams are not transferred over and therefore they must rebuild their teams by purchasing more packs to acquire the best players. One gamer told us that this cycle resulted in them spending “almost £800 to £1000 a year annually on FIFA”.144 Another gamer told us that because a pack’s contents “directly affects gameplay because some players are not as good as others”, it incentivises people to keep buying packs in the hope of getting better players and, therefore, performing better in the game. They told us that:

in order to compete, players feel like they need to buy hundreds, if not thousands, of £s worth of packs in order to get the best players. Children are especially vulnerable because they lack the maturity to understand that these purchases are manipulative, and their parents may not understand that these purchases are entirely unnecessary.145

77.Moreover, because the probability of securing some footballers in a pack is less than 1%, some gamers have expressed frustration at spending vast amounts without receiving the desired reward.146 To tackle the issue of speculative spending on loot boxes, one player recommended that:

the sale of items in game, cosmetic or otherwise, should only be allowed via direct purchase or via achievements unlocked through in game actions. In a loot box type system the player, typically, has a very small chance of unlocking the item they actually want. This encourages further spending on loot boxes in order to get the item they want.147

78.We put some of these concerns to Kerry Hopkins from Electronic Arts, who responded that the way they have implemented this mechanic in FIFA “is quite ethical and quite fun”.148 Yet this is noticeably out of step with the attitude of many of the gamers who contacted us following our evidence session, including those who vehemently rejected her characterisation of packs not as loot boxes but as “surprise mechanics”.149 One gamer called the company’s testimony to us “a bare face lie”, and another told us that the company has:

heavily marketed and referred to their systems as ‘loot boxes’ for several years and […] the mechanics of the system are exactly the same no matter what they choose to call it.150

79.We recommend that loot boxes that contain the element of chance should not be sold to children playing games, and instead in-game credits should be earned through rewards won through playing the games. In the absence of research which proves that no harm is being done by exposing children to gambling through the purchasing of loot boxes then we believe the precautionary principle should apply and they are not permitted in games played by children until the evidence proves otherwise.

Sum FãggOtt
Take two is run by idiots. Why would they attack a guy who’s practically giving their game free advertisement?

Sealedinterface
Because they're afraid that the information leaking early will cost them pre-orders once it gets revealed in full. They think the only hype people will have will come from their own official sources, and hype coming from unofficial leaks is costing them money.
Why SupMatto?
They wanted to make an example to drive fear into all BL3 youtubers, and SupMatto was just big enough to make people notice, and just small enough to get crushed without legal resistance.

Enclavefakesoldier
I remember seeing someone comment in one of UEGs videos a few weeks ago who claimed he came from matto's discord. The reason take two axed him is because BL3 will have post launch DLC after the review cycle. Basically pulling what activision did with CTR

OblivionSA
@Enclavefakesoldier I remember seeing this as well. I want to say it was in the comments for YongYea or maybe TheQuartering. They had indicated it was because some of the info he had may have been about their plans to add loot boxes and other monetization to the game right after all the reviews were released. They didn't want that getting out so people would still buy their game thinking it was micro-transaction free as I believe they had promised. Then they can use the games as a service excuse to force an update with all the monetization crammed in without getting any of the bad PR and lost sales from reviews mentioning it up front.

Kelvin
And it was good advertising lol. One game I play did the opposite, they give leaks to the more proeminent youtubers from the community, the lead developer often joins in video streams with them to discuss about the development, and they even hired a programmer that created one of the most used third-party tools for this game.

crazyinsane
Many people covered it. However, they all said the same thing and didn't follow up on it. In fact, Yong is a terrible offender in this regard as he, unironically and unquestioningly, used IGN and Kotaku as a primary source. Nobody bothered trying to reach out to Submatto, his fans, or anyone else involved besides 2k up until now. I'm pretty sure, nobody else has addressed much of the misinformation campaign by 2k as spread by IGN and Inside Gaming. UEG is doing something very unusual by actually looking into the situation more in-depth than any of his contemporaries, who likely won't issue a follow-up to correct widespread misinformation.

Cornelius Dobeneck
In Germany it is a serious crime to openly claim someone committed a crime when he/she did not. In Supmattos case this claim cost him his "job" and he should sue the outlets who said so pointing out that their lies destroyed his live and endangered the well being of his family. Should be interesting. In addition to that this whole thing need to be published more and T2 boycotted. They need us, we do not need them.

Derek Capron
When the dust settles, I genuinely I wish that Supmatto would find the means to file a lawsuit against them as a corp and hell on an individual stand point. This falls under defamation of character and I am sure there is an attorney out there that would find several other avenues to attack at. The reality though is the cost of that would be extensive and the legal battle very arduous. It is a damn shame where this industry has gone, from the once loved and revered aspect that it was to what adulterated abomination it is now.

Everspace 2 devs talk about Epic's and Valve's storefronts: "Without Epic, Rockfish and Everspace wouldn't exist, but it's the same with Steam"; "Valve has the best platform, by far, to roll out a game as an independent developer"
*SNIP*
"Plus, our hardcore fans are on Steam," Schade adds. "They have already said 'Please don't do it. We just don't want it.' You don't even have to discuss whether this is reasonable or not. If they don't want it, they don't want it, and more than 100,000 people bought Everspace in Early Access. They would be mad at us.

Jump back to quoted post6 Sep 2019, 14:41 PMJae For Jett

Well that's being generous...