Far Cry 5 Thread:

If that was the case... why didn't performance change when Denuvo was removed from DOOM? Or Titanfall 2?

Why does MGS5 and Mad Max perform fantastically?


I see people try to throw out "Well look at Arkham Knight/DisHonored 2?!"
Yet, the performance issues in those games had absolutely nothing to do with the games using Denuvo. If that was the cause, why didn't PREY or Death of the Outsider perform badly? How did DisHonored 2 and Arkham Knight's performance improve so drastically, yet both still use Denuvo?


There's a lot of false information thrown around about Denuvo just because people don't like it being included in games. Crying that "DRM" is horrible, yet they continue to buy games from STEAM... which is actually a form of DRM as well.

 

Yah, much crying from people that don't like paying money.

I've never had any trouble with any of it.

 

The major difference is that games like arkham knight was for many people largely cpu limited, thus removing a cpu consuming thing like denuvo would improve performance.

Doom barely uses the cpu, so obviously that game sees close to zero performance difference with Denuvo removed.

Far cry 5 on the other hand is quite intensive on the cpu, so many people might see a performance increase with denuvo removed.

 

DRM or paying money?

 

Hehehe

 

Yet, people saw drastic performance improvements in the game through patches and fixes... not the removal of Denuvo.

Before the patches, I could barely run Arkham Knight at medium settings and get 30fps.
After the patches... full 1080p, maxed settings and a solid 60fps. Yet Denuvo remains.

This false idea that Denuvo hurts game performance needs to just be stomped out. The program does not hurt, hinder, hold back or cause performance problems in and of itself.
As with anything to do with a game's performance, optimization, CPU or memory utilization... falls on the developer and how well they do their job.

 

Because prey graphics are pretty low standard and ofc will run fine, dishonored 2 has very bad optimization

 

Sorry, but that is horribly inaccurate.
People can feel whatever they wish about PREY's visual fidelity. But, a game having "low end graphics" does not mean it will run fine.

It doesn't matter if a game pushes the boundaries of what's possible, or if it falls a few steps behind the norm. It takes time, effort, energy and attention to make a game run smoothly. Regardless of the engine or level of graphical technicality.
There are plenty of games that look way worse then PREY, and run WAY worse.

 

I wonder how much do game companies like Ubisoft pay for game protection for services like Denuvo. In the end, they are useless as they eventually get "cracked".

 

I suppose the ultimate purpose is to protect the software as long as possible (=secure legitimate sales on release).

 

Yes, they do get cracked... but they are not as useless as you might think.
First week sales are the biggest numbers for most new releases. And, most publishers use services like Denuvo to ensure those first week to even first month sales. As those initial days are when most are projected to have their biggest moments.

After that, they rely on various promotional sales and offers to increase sales.

But, if Denuvo can do, as it has been for Ubisoft, protect those first few weeks... I doubt they have any real issues or disappointments with the service.

 

I really like this game overall, but one of the biggest weaknesses of this game visually, is when the ground textures are exposed (aka not covered by foilage). Not only do they have a horribly short LOD distance, they aren't of very high quality even up close. However, some tesselation can help a great deal in that regard, and the curious thing is that the game does make use of tesselation in some places, where the ground as a result look much better, but most places the ground is just a flat texture of low quality.

 

I think it's misguided to say Denuvo doesn't effect performance without knowing how these games are cracked there's no way of doing a legitimate side by side comparison, for all we know the cracked versions could be simulating something in Denuvo to fool it into thinking it's a legitimate copy and it could actually still be running in the background. Without knowing the full details there's no real evidence to prove Denuvo has zero effect on performance unless devs release a non protected official version of the game, and even then it's not one situation fits all here, as others have stated some games are more CPU bound and some are more GPU bound not to mention all the other differences in game engines etc,

Honestly you sound like you work for Denuvo, some kind of pro DRM rally here

also check out this video for final fantasy XV loading times, cracked versus official loading time, the retail version loading times are ridiculous compared to the cracked version and there's noticeable stuttering in the retail release so yeah clearly the DRM is not playing nice in this game .

 

@stereoman Actually FF XV loading screen was a bug on steamworks implementation and not gameworks, I think it is fixed now.

As for Denuvo not impacting performance.
Well, denuvo do impact performance, but not to the extent people do believe, people expect major improvements in performance in both AC Origins, like if the game runs like crap because of that
There was a guy that tested DOOM before and after DOOM's Denuvo removel.

He saw a 6-7% improvement in the framerate on areas where he probably was CPU Bound.
Problem is, the tests that he conducted compare the version when vulkan was included and the version after denuvo removal, ignoring that the GTX 1060 recieved multiple Vulkan updates that improved it's performance as well as the game.

Here the links anyway: http://www.game-debate.com/news/226...d-doom-benchmarks-with-and-without-denuvo-drm

So I don't expect denuvo to impact that much the performance.
Cheers

 

Yeah saw that too, must have been using Bliss at the time, lols.

 

I have the steam version and my save game loads in under 10 seconds. Loading screens while fast travelling are 1-3 seconds at most. 1 minute is the time it took for the PS4 version to load

 

SO... about that FarCry 5...

Just finished off Faith. So, the final area is open to me. But, I've still got stuff to do in Faith's region. So, priorities...

 

I'll probably get to a point where I'll begin to get slightly tired of the game and will only want to finish it. I've fine combed John's region but it took a lot of time for obvious reasons. Regarding Faith's region it didn't take long before the rep meter was full and I have only discovered half of that map. I'd like to finish the game before GoW is released

 

I found Jacob's region went by the quickest. His looked really cool, with all the cliffs and valleys... but, the resistance meter filled up really fast.
I've been in Faith's area a while, and just now took her out.

But, I've still got Cult outposts to take down, a few side missions, Prepper stashes and other things to do before I go after Joseph.

 

this works !!! thanks man
in far cry 4 i uses to have to unpack the game files with dunia unpack app manual find the .cfg for the pre sets for low ,med,high,ultra and delete the line ( dof and fxaa ) repack the game files so i still got post fx bloom