250
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2024
250 points (97.7% liked)
Games
16812 readers
513 users here now
Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)
Posts.
- News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
- Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
- No humor/memes etc..
- No affiliate links
- No advertising.
- No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
- No self promotion.
- No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
- No politics.
Comments.
- No personal attacks.
- Obey instance rules.
- No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
- Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.
My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.
Other communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Yeah, people don't talk like what you said, but they do make implications, like he did exactly here. He isn't directly stating all their critics are just salty pirates, but he sure as shit is implying it.
He goes on to say about the plight of gamers, but stating this first and foremost makes it very clear what he thinks.
Logic-wise, this whole article is about their "attempt" to reconcile with the gaming community - so while I also don't get the logic behind burning the bridge while claiming to be trying to fix it, that is what they're doing.
Sorry, no, do not see any implication.
The interviewer asked him to give an explanation for why people hate Denuvo. The reasons are varied, so no matter what he says, that answer is not going to represent every single gamer. Instead, he comes up with one major explanation for the source of Denuvo hatred, and it makes sense. He even points out, as you quoted that "they have a lot of time to spend in communities and share their view and try to blame Denuvo for a lot of things". As a result, once there's even circumstantial evidence that - for instance - the tech hurts performance or causes games to crash, that ends up getting a lot of non-pirates on their side. So to bring up that specific case of how that message spread, it even seems to go against the implication "all Denuvo haters are pirates".
Basically, two different parties are going into online discussions with their own relatively biased goals of changing opinions about Denuvo. As of this interview, Denuvo is one of those. No one is denying they have an agenda. He's making the point that pirate groups are the other. Nowhere in that paragraph that I quoted did I see anything even implying "All gamers are X", and honestly I'm tired of people making that leap in logic.
Lastly, what did you even mean about burning a bridge?
Look, I'm not here for a pointless back and forth where we just call each other wrong over and over again, so I'm making one last comment then I'm leaving it at that.
Yes, his major hypothesis being that the most vocal people about these apparently non-existent issues (their critics) are the pirate community who want game publishers not to use Denuvo's software, and as such influence non-pirates who don't see any benefit to using Denuvo (because it adds bloat and messes with their games).
Which is to say that he thinks the ones trying to influence people away from Denuvo, as in those criticising Denuvo for its issues, are pirates.
You grasp that, yet when I say the quiet part out loud that they're implying all their critics are pirates, you disagree with me.
And nowhere in my post did I imply he meant all gamers were pirates. I said he believes their critics are salty pirates, as to dismiss those in the gaming community whoare vocal about thinking Denuvo hurts their games.
This whole article is about Denuvo attempting to win back over the gaming community, so them turning around and effectively labeling the most vocal in the community as pirates is (in a phrase) burning the bridge with thr gamimg community they're claiming to be trying to fix.
Clearly we disagree on the interpretation of what this guy said, and I doubt any comment I could make would sway yo on that front, but I don't think it's a very hard conclusion to draw based on his own words.
No, that’s not how discussion works. If you want to participate and have your points criticized, open yourself up for response. You don’t get to steal the last word and seem brave about it.
I’ll read the rest of that if you feel like actually engaging. In future, if you decide you don’t want to be involved in an online discussion, don’t participate in it; even for having the “last word”. I promise you, you’re probably better off for it and no one will call you a loser for deciding not to argue online.