• Kaldo@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Seems like gaming piracy is really dying this time for sure. Most sites are compromised and untrustworthy, big teams are retiring, the one remaining denuvo cracker that i heard of is apparently psychotic… It doesn’t seem like it bodes well

    • Raphaël A. Costeau@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Isn’t just piracy that’s dying, in my opinion, it’s gaming itself, or, at least, gaming as it used to be.

      Besides Denuvo being a technology so bad that actually makes the original game worst than a copy without it, everyday comes with tons and tons of games with a pay-to-win approach or some kind of PBE. The only new, original and fun games nowadays are the indies, and it will be that way for a long time, as the industry seems to focus more and more in the mobile market since it’s already bigger than the PC and console together.

      CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        For sure, indies are where it’s at. Most of my time gaming has been on indies for many years now. They are actually willing to do interesting things instead of chasing trends and money.

        Occasionally you get large studios doing things like Baldur’s Gate 3, but it’s rare. Larian and FromSoft are about the only studios I trust to make good experiences that aren’t designed by the business team to make as much money as possible.

      • Auli@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Gaming is definitely not dying it is a huge market. I don’t agree with the direction it’s heading though. But there are enough games released to keep my interest.

      • Kaldo@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Looking at the world rn, I dont think things have a tendency to get better on their own. In a decade or two people won’t even believe we lived in the wild west era of internet where you could just get stuff for free without a subscription, online connection or drm.

        • lichtmetzger@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          When people run out of money to pay for a billion subscriptions, companies will have to think hard about their business model. I don’t think the current trend can last forever.

          Look at the fragmentation of streaming services. Piracy is on the rise again because of it.

          • Kaldo@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s why I said gaming piracy before, I don’t think denuvo can protect media files (yet) and those are less likely to be malware or cryptominers anyway. So I think that aspect is safe for now at least, but rip gaming.

          • Auli@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Sure on the rise maybe in this small circle but it has declined alot from its peak.

        • DudePluto@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Looking at the world rn, I dont think things have a tendency to get better on their own

          This is called a recency bias (I think lol) - you’re looking at the world rn and assuming its trends must continue. When you look at history you see that there are ebbs and flows, and that stasis is rare. If you focus on certain things, you may certainly decide we’re in a downtrend. There will always be an uptrend afterward. And vice versa

          • Kaldo@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s way too big of a generalization. The fact is that technology advances and makes other technology obsolete, and the pirates are dwindling while DRM companies are getting more and more money to fix the issue. It is not going to just magically reverse at one point. If anything the people are just going to get more accustomed to it like they have already with copyright laws, subscription services and simply not owning anything digital anymore.

            The second thing you’re not addressing is how long the “ebb and flow” takes anyway, if gaming piracy has a resurgence in 50 years then I don’t think I’m gonna care much about it by then lol. Blizzard games aren’t getting cracked anymore and by the time they do, if ever, I’m not going to care about them.

              • Kaldo@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Precisely the reason they’d be worth cracking I’d say. Anyway that was just an example, same goes for many EA / Ubi games for which it’s just a matter of time before are perma-online or under denuvo.

            • DudePluto@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              The fact is that technology advances and makes other technology obsolete,

              Yeah, it happens on both sides, it’s an arms race. It will swing the other way eventually - it always has and always will

              The second thing you’re not addressing is how long the “ebb and flow” takes anyway

              That was intentional. There’s no estimating a timeline, but with the development of technology it’s not unreasonable to expect a reversal even in a decade. Anyway, if you’re trying to ward off doomerism you’re not going to do it by only looking at what you stand to gain

  • totallynotfbi@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The images are too compressed, so I can’t really make out what they say. I’m guessing that EA finally updated their outdated Denuvo implementation, making it much tougher to crack now

    • Kissaki@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Current AI is not smarter than humans. It needs supervised training, and then acts according to that. That’s inherently incompatible to novelty and correct exploration.

      • Send_me_nude_girls@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        AI is good in doing complex things but bad at doing easy things. Supervision is required for learning of course, there’s no AI that works out of the box.

      • B3_CHAD@lemmy.dbzer0.comOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, any sufficiently advanced A.I can and will outclass humans. For example: there are chess A.I’s that have beaten GM’s as good as Magnus Carlsen on multiple occasions. The better an A.I gets at something the tougher it becomes to counter it. This is one of the biggest risks of A.I development that one day we might make something that makes us seem obsolete. On the positive side that day is really really far.

        • Raphaël A. Costeau@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          19 days ago

          First: you’re comparing Chess, what’s a super simple algorithm, in what machines already “outclassed humans” like, years ago, with anything humans can do. That’s is simplist and wrong.

          Second: until today, the so called Artificial “Intelligence” were only capable of, by consulting a human made big catalogue of many things humans did, reproduce some parts of it or resume a little, what is not that difficult if you have a good synonyms dictionary and tons of human people training you on what is a decent resume and what isn’t. In resume, A.“I.” doesn’t do anything that people didn’t did before, and, when it comes to write texts, it does something objectly worst, in a self-help level of writing. A.“I.” isn’t creative.

          Third: still, there are objectly a bunch of works that are under attack by A.“I.”. The thing about this works is that: or they were obviously possible to be automated before, or they are pointless, or they’ve been doing automatically (a.k.a. alienabally) by the workers, or all the above.

          Fourth: the big guys who are trying to sell everyone the idea that A.“I.” will “outclass all of us” want to believe that there’s no need for human work to generate income, what’s is materialistically and economically not true at all. They say they dream of a world without hard work, actually they mean a world without us, working class people. But they’re wrong, they are still depending on our existence as a class and always will be until the day there will be no classes anymore.

          CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

        • Auli@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t know if AI is technically better it’s just different and doesn’t play like a human. Humans hate lossing pieces but AI doesn’t care as long as the outcome is a win.

          • Send_me_nude_girls@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            AI absolutely plays like a human as it’s trained by humans. The only difference is, AI will do the most optimal move, while humans might hesitate. That’s also the reason why it’s bad to put AI into fighter or bomber jets. The AI has a clear goal but a human might struggle to fire.

          • gjghkk@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Newsflash: Humans also sacrifice pieces in chess. Chess engines are mathematical beasts that are designed for these things only. But what is more important: Chess engines also needs to be made by humans.

        • Kissaki@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Where between being beaten in chess and making us obsolete do you think we are? Where do you think cracking games is between chess and human mind?

          I think your estimation is off by a lot.

        • reddithalation@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          how so? ignoring mathematically unbreakable things like encryption, given enough time, i think pretty much anything could be reverse engineered and cracked, its just a matter of how much time it would take

            • reddithalation@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              yeah but your cpu has to run the unencrypted game, and so i would think its currently impossible to have a local, 100% uncrackable game

              • Send_me_nude_girls@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                DRM already only does check for validity every other frame or even minute. There’s no use in a game that just closes because it recognized a violation. You do know what causes Denuvo fps spikes? It’s whenever it checks. Of course the software got better by now so it’s less of an issue but it’s still there.