SE - REMOVE DRM! 100% proved - DENUVO kills 16% of performance comparing to DRM free DEMO!

DENUVO 100% KILLS ABOUT 10 of 60 or 20 of 120 FPS or 16% of overall performance comparing to DEMO that has no Denuvo, AND definetly DENUVO causing stuttering and slow downs that did not happen in DEMO version.

THIS PERFORMANCE KILLING DRM DEFINETELY NEEDS TO BE REMOVED FROM ABSOLUTELY EVERY GAME IT STILL PRESENT IN!

We should force Valve to enforce a rule to all publishers - no multilayer DRM on steam games, no other DRM than steam owns, should be present in games, if some features require third party client like Uplay or Rockstars Social Club, it may exist, but should not act as DRM, it should only act as provider of publisher's own services and should not include any addition encryption and scramblind of code, because Valve steam DRM !

Originally posted by L4rise:

Steam vs Microsoft store's performance hit

I have tried both demo from the steam store and Microsoft store and had some performance difference. Hoping it would be fix, I went ahead of pre-ordering on steam.



My Laptop's Hardware

I7 6700hq

GTX1070 (laptop equivalent)

16GB RAM



I would get around 60-80fps on high settings with Nvidia turf and Hairworks on with the MS store's version. With steam's version, I seem to be taking hits with the frames sitting at around 45 - 55 fps with the same settings above (and also playing around with the settings).



As of the release of the full version, I'm still getting the same perfromance hit and sitting around the 45-60fps, I have also turned of ansel to see if it was causing performance issue, however it still persist.



I'm wondering if this is a thing and if it can be fix, otherwise I wish to refund this and purchase the other version from Micrsoft store's.



EDIT: GPU seems to run hotter when playing on Window's store



Other issue: Model twitching was present on steam versions



Update: I've Changed Rendering scale down to 50%, played around with lower resolution, and nothing has changed.



It seems my system is being capp'ed by something. As it stays 45-55fps

Last edited by L4rise; 3 hours ago

dnous: Originally posted by dnous: Originally posted by



Edit: Clarified that I purchased the Windows Store version.

For those that care. The Windows Store version has got better performance. Whereas my systemen was providing me with 35-45 fps I now get 55-60 fps on the same settings with sometimes a drop to 48 (with dialogs for some reason). I'm sticking with the Windows Store version.

I wasnt not in that anti-denuvo hype wagon, but i just compared DEMO and FULL version on exactly the same settings and get in average around 16% lower performance at same or even lower settings than i had in DEMO at same or even higher settings. Also full version has slowdowns and stutters that was not present at same settings in DEMO version, which 100% proves that anti-denuvo hypers\haters (who i suspected was just trolls, but i was wrong) was right about it!I will update this thread soon with video proves of recorded performance and settings difference i and many other witnessed, which makes its absolutely clear that DENUVO cost us all around 16% of performance and not ust performance as is, but a stability of performance as you cant get stable framerate with Denuvo protected version of game.Just a message to every sceptic - download demo (until SE removed it or updated exe to cover the truth about Denuvo negative performance impact, if you already has it download - backup all exe and dll files from demo), replace your legaly obtained full version exe (and maybe dll too, but try wih just exe 1st) with legaly obtained demo version exe - and run game with same settings and assets as full version -witness much faster and stable performance and believe your own eyes - denuvo definetly ruined FF15 (and most likely every other game it was and still is present).I demand SE to remove this DRM from this (and every othher of their games) no matter the cost, if that will not be done by SE in next few days, it may end up with class action that will force SE to remove Denuvo and will cost even more.Anyone who affected buy this performance downgrade caused by denuvo - please stop acting like kids screaming "denuvo exploded my computer" and stop insulting SE and discreding real issues with denuvo, and simply demand removal of Denuvo and use demo as prove of negative performance and stability impact, als consider joining class action in case denuvo will not be removed ASAP and make sure you let know SE that you will join class action if denuvo will not be removed.Also i suggest everyone to write to valve support and personaly to Gaben a demands to enforce a rule on steam that none of third party code scrambling\encryption DRM besides steam stab and infamouse publisher's own launchers such as Uplay, Origin, but yet again - without exe scrambling and encryption shou be present in any game released on steam - all released game should be update and any of such type of DRM including Denuvo, Securom, Tages, Starforce etc must be removed, and non of such types of DRM should be allowed in any future releases on steam. We have to fight for our rights and have to force Valve to do something in favour of customers instead of always favoring publishers that strippings us all of our rights and ruining our performance with such a DRM!Shor version:Update:Here is very interesting report about better performance in Windows store version of FF15 that has no Denuvo:How about that, guy got GTX 1070 and getting - 60-80 fps on high settings with Denuvo free Windows Store version and only 45-55 fps at lower settings in steam denuvo protected version, and it seems that Denuvo protected version has performance sorta capped? Do we need more evidence? We already have 3 version to compare, Demo, Win Store and Steam and 2 of these that has no Denuvo has much better performance, and one that has Denuvo has worst performance. Coincidence? I doubt it!Another update for sceptics - this thread and many other on this forum has a lot of independand user reports about lower frame rate in full version comparing to demo and windows store, reports like this:Im not going to post them all here, you can find them all yourself if you are not lazy and has some brains.Some people stated that MS store version has denuvo, but with UWP architecture its highly doubtable, especially after several users reported that whole assumption that UWP version has denuvo was only based on EULA on Windows store, and people already found the catch - Windows Store has STEAM version EULA, someone at square enix was lazy or did mistake, so whatever Windows store EULA says is about Steam version, not the Windows store one.There is also a new article on PC Gamer tha states that denuvo does not kill any performance. While its written by Durante who is know by some fixes... there is alway a catch, and catch is calle GAMING JOURNALISM and PC GAMER. If you are still living in a la-la-land and not aware of how modern big game journalism and criticism works, internet has tons of evidence of this, it works like this:Big game journalist are bunch of liars and sell outs who does not give you objective information about games flaws and related subject (including protection systems), until they totally butthurt by something and that feeling can surpass their greed (but thats a rare case). Instead in most of cases they advertise games, services and related stuff, including DRM, they do it by giving positive image of what any sane person with own objective opinion would consider negative, and they not just do that, they shape a culture of worshiping to corporations, they way they speak about corporative products, culture, developers, is totally misleading and makes you feel like you have to "support" "poor" developers and toss them all your money, no matter how bad game or some anti-customers measure (like you know DLC, season passes, denuvo, uplay, activation limits, poor ports and regular stuff) are. They also shap a culture of almost religious fanatism of corporation, which includes irresistable urge to buy everything corporation twors at them, and also (thats the worst part) shapes an army of corporate leaned sort of SJWs, that atacking anyone who criticisizing their PRECIOUS corporation for every wrongdoing. and this army of brainwashed zealot zombies doing an excuse and damage control for corporations, so they dont even need to participate in dicsussion of their products, and just need to sit and watch ho their zombie SJW army defend them against any criticism or demands for improvement of product and customers expirience with it.In case this does not work and somehow mass of unsatisfied customers vocalise their opinion loader than army of zealot zombies creatd by game journalists... same game journalists comes to rescue as final frontier of opinion shaping, advertsing and damage control machine, and corporation tossing them extra money to say something like "no no no no, its good, buy it!" or something more specific to our case like "NO NO NO NO, DENUVO DOES NOT KILL PERFORMANCE". And things gets even more funnier, when same game journal site that writes such damage control paid articles, contradict themselves and just wrote opposite a while ago.There are even some game journalists and journals who are smart enough and invented a scheme - criticize or publish third party criticizm or actually starting the scandl, and this is initially aimed to force publishers to paid them extra to write opposite damage control articles.Now back to Durante - i know him as good guy, but he became a way too often "guest start" of PC gamer almost like a full time member, and he surely get paid for this. and i saw way to many good guys in my life who became corrupted and turned into corporate shills, liars and sell outs once they saw bag of money offered by corporations for making them a good advertising. And i and internet remember way too many lies and corporate shilling from PC gamer, that may have corruped Durante since he started to have a deal with them.So i personally would trust more some unbiased opinion of random guy on internet than opinion of anyone who writes for money for PC Gamer, IGN and any big sites like that. You may wonder why?There is no profit and no reason for me and other legit onwers who reported the same issue to lie that denuvo kills performance in full version comparing to demo and win store version, we dont get paid for this, we just want to enjoy game at maximum possible performance with best looking graphics.But there is a profit and reason to lie for Durante or anyone else who writes articles for big gaming sites or making videos for popular youtube channels (I mention them as alternative to game journals, which, unfortunatelly also getting corrupt in top tier) - and reason is simple - they get paid for this.So i trust people who tell things for free and sincerely and just want to enjoy game, and i dont trust anyone who gets paid for writing their "honnest" opinion. And i would not trust anyone who get paid if i was you.Also the way Durante write this article is shady, there is no video evidence that proves that he used exactly same settings in both version, the way he speaks in article is sneaky - he trying to avoid clear and direct statements like "I ABSOLUTELY SURE DENUVO DOES NOT AFFECT PERFORMANCE" he playing with words every statemen sounds like "i doubt it, not sure about it, maybe yes or maybe no, who knows?" and there is no clear conclusion tha denuvo does not do that, also there is quite clear evidence that laoding times are slower with denuvo, but again "maybe yes or maybe not, it might do that". This is clear indication of inner conflict on Durante, that feels like if he forced or obligated by paid deal to give Denuvo an excuse, but because inside he does not really want that, he sorta playing around with words and far fatching thing and in the end he does not give any 100% confident conclusions and leave this question open for people judgment... but many people dont like to think much so the see name of article, see the durante, see the big site name, they dont even see that he does not clearly state anything, but they already pretty sure that he debunked my version... which he did not.Another difference between my statement and his - i am confident in what i say, i have no inner conlfict, im pretty sure this performance difference is denuvo fault. And one thing you should know - im not member of anti-denuvo cult that writes nonse like "denuvo explodes your computer" and actinlg like childish trolls every time game released with denuvo. Before FF15 i had not chance to compare denuvo free and denuvo protected versions of game so i was not on anti denuvo side, and i even argued with anti-denuvers, and i told them that if by any chance i will see myself undenyable prove that denuvo affects perfromance that much that it would be reasonable to start all the anti denuvo hype - i will admit that i was wrong and will undestand all the buzz about it. but until that moment i will have my doubts.This moment happend thanks to FF15 and i changed my opinion after i saw evidence myself. and on of pages of this thread i met user who memorized my words and recognized me and was happy to see that i kept my words, changed my opinion on denuvo and admited i was wrong. So this is the prove that i was not part of that movement (and despite im against denuvo now, i dont consider myself as part of their movement, i think their behavior and prejudgment discrediting their good intentions and makes all states about denuvo look like a joke) and that i am not the anti denuvo fanati, not troll and not biased and not interested to spread misinformation. Even if did some mistakes in my methods of performance comparision - i did them sincerely and i believe what i say.Cant say the same about what Duranto said and did, l said before why it does not look like he actually believes what he say, but more important thing that hist methodology does not look like sincere to me. There are obvious mistakes but im not sure it was not done on purpose.1st - there is no video showing setttings of both and other things he did. Some people called me liar and said that i had no evidence only because i did not post videos i promised (and my apology for this, i tried to record video few times but was distracted by more important business and had to start over again, i just had not enough free time to finish that, it also took a while to make preparations and show everything, including both configs as clearly as possible and make everything bullet proof, will do that in a week when ill have free time), but yet same people trust Durante and dont call him liar and not saying he has no evidence, even despite there is no evidence. What kind of double standards are that? You dont trust me because i have no video and you trust a guy who gets paid for article on PC gamers busted in their lies and your trust guy who has no video as well? Are you serious? You dont even can be assured that both has same settings and same conditions.He only has fancy graphsbut i can draw you graphs like that with any random data, that would not prove that is actual data from game.But lets say graphs are real - there are few things Durante did not really mention or wasnt not honnest about, which actually proves my statements in comments of this thread:1) Graphs show a little better FPS in most cases in DEMO at 4.1 ghz - this does not contradict my statements as i stated that at newed CPUs difference reduced progressively and as faster your CPU as less noticable performance difference would be, and while Durante claim its almost identical, there is a systematic, small but important difference where demo is the best performer in most of cases.2) Article only shows and discusses results for 4.1 ghz CPU... most people would be lazy to follow url and loot at graphs, many will not even notice it. So it looks like trick to me that is based on hope that people would not look at full graph... or maybe its like a tip about truth that he has no freedom to write about ( i still believe in good of this guy, but he totally should not hang out wiht PC gamer sell outs, and i suppose he had some rules and limitations about what he can say in article and what he cant, so maybe he wanted to be sincere but was not allowed so he gave us graph which contradics what he say and proves my point). Anyway graph shows that on 3.1 ghz difference between demo and full version performance way more dramatic and notticable - which is exactly what i said many times. Why did not he mention this dramatical increase of perfromance difference at slower CPU mode? And keep in mind that this CPU is quite new comparing to my - im using very old 1st generation Core i7 920, which i overclocked to 3.6-3.78 ghz from inital 2.67, so in my case of slower CPU that one he tested - difference even more dramatic between demo and full game, and his graphs already show this tendency. I also have way older gpu 4gb GTX 680 instead of 1080 he uses (thanks to mines), so this also adds dramatic increase in performance difference between demo and full version. But if there was not denuvo, there would not be this dramatic difference in performance on my setup - but because its older and slower this difference is more noticable and takes these 16% i told about.I wanted also to mention that 50% of render resolution was quite a cheat to boost up overal performance to make the difference between demo and full version less significant, and there was few more thing he did wrong, which i would not discuss because hidden 3.1 ghz results he "forgot" to mention and 50% render resultion cheat proves that article is shady and sneaky and does not really contradicts anything i stated, in a matter of fact it proves my point, he just does not tell you that directly in your face, but he shows that with 3.1 graphs and 50% render resolution that scales these graphs higher than they should be and reduce CPU load.And you trusted this article without giving any afterthought to it? Sorry Marios, but your proves of no performance impact of denuvo are in another castles.