The article mentions that most publishers will license it for 6-12 months, but it's going to vary. Basically keeping Denuvo in use indefinitely costs more money than only using it for a short time.
From a business perspective I think it makes sense to license it for that first 6-12 month period. As a consumer too I wouldn't mind that: let them protect the initial sales period and then remove the DRM for long-term use. Early adopters will get the shitty version of the game... but that's already true in so many other ways.
Huin said publishers license Denuvo technology "for a certain amount of time, [maybe] six months or a year," mainly to protect that initial sales period. After that, many publishers decline to renew that lease and instead release an updated version of the game that is not protected by Denuvo.
What grinds my gears with all the people (whether Denuvo officials or elsewhere) that claim that it has no effect on performance: they only focus on average FPS. Never a consideration for FPS lows or FPS time spent on frames that took more than N milliseconds. Definitely not any look at loading times.
I'm willing to believe a good implementation of Denuvo has a negligible impact on average FPS. I think every time I saw anyone test loading times though, it had a clear and consistent negative impact. I've never seen anyone check FPS lows (or similar) but with the way Denuvo works I expect it's similar.
Performance is more than average framerate and they hide behind a veil of pretending that it is the totality of all performance metrics.
And here I thought he had finally disappeared from gaming.
Let's be realistic: this is another scam by him. Everyone likes to brush it off as him as dreaming bigger than he can pull off and getting caught up in his own hype or whatever. But no, after you do it enough times in a row for enough decades without deviation, it's hard to deny what it is.
That's the automod for the sub in question. It's not a reddit wide bot in this case.
Of course, it could be that reddit's admins are helping mods make these kinds of reactions. I'd believe that. But the account itself in question (automoderator) doesn't tell us anything about how reddit's admins feel.
Maybe unpopular opinion... Should Halo invert its focus? Currently it's multiplayer first, singeplayer second. If the multiplayer modes cannot maintain a playerbase then its not going to be a main driver of success. The battle royale and hero shooter crazes haven't left much room for the Halo multiplayer format to succeed these days: most of the potential players are focusing on something else.
I think if they could deliver kickass campaigns consistently that they could keep Halo as a successful franchise. If they keep chasing multiplayer it'll fade into obscurity soon enough.
The article mentions that most publishers will license it for 6-12 months, but it's going to vary. Basically keeping Denuvo in use indefinitely costs more money than only using it for a short time.
From a business perspective I think it makes sense to license it for that first 6-12 month period. As a consumer too I wouldn't mind that: let them protect the initial sales period and then remove the DRM for long-term use. Early adopters will get the shitty version of the game... but that's already true in so many other ways.