Here's how much Crytek paid Denuvo to protect Crysis Remastered from pirates

Polycount

Posts: 2,764   +571
Staff member
In context: Most major AAA publishers use some form of DRM in their games, but Denuvo is certainly among the most popular solutions around. Though it's occasionally seen early cracks, typically Denuvo does a great job of protecting early sales by delaying piracy for at least a couple of weeks. However, exactly how much publishers pay for this privilege has always been an unknown... until now.

Reddit account "FCKDRM" (which oddly, is the same name GOG uses for its anti-DRM initiative) discovered this information by examining a set of documents released by the "Egregor" hack -- a ransomware attack that resulted in the publication of private data belonging to both Ubisoft and Crytek.

Among that data is what appears to be a contract between Crytek and Denuvo, signed by representatives from both parties: Denuvo Managing Director Reinhard Blaukovitsch and Crytek CEO Avni Yerli. In the document, Denuvo lays out the prices Crytek needs to pay to license its anti-piracy tech for Crysis 1 and 2's remasters -- though the latter remains unannounced.

The fees start with two payments of €60,000 and €80,000 for Denuvo's anti-tamper protection and "unique encryption." Combined, that amounts to €140,000, or €280,000 for both games, and it covers Crysis 1 and 2 Remastered for 12 months from the date the games initially go on sale. Once that 12-month period is up, Crytek can optionally extend protection for another €2,000 per month.

Crytek is also required to pay an additional one-off fee of €60,000 within 30 days of reaching the 500,000 unit sales mark (or 500,000 "cumulative first time activations"). Furthermore, for every additional platform Crytek decides to sell its games on, it will incur a one-off fee of €10,000, and all WeGame sales incur a €0.40 fee for each first time activation.

We don't know how much Crytek wound up paying as we don't have sales figures for Crysis Remastered, but it was undoubtedly a sizable chunk of change, and other publishers probably pay similarly-high fees for access to Denuvo. However, these companies clearly feel the expense is worth it since Denuvo continues to find its way into new titles.

Permalink to story.

 

winjer

Posts: 112   +381
It's very obvious by the quality of the released product, that crytec didn't have a big budget for this remaster.
Considering that there are mods better than this remaster, speaks volumes to the lack of effort in making this remaster.
Wasting this much money on denuvo, just took out a big chunk of the initial budget.
This condemned this game to be much worse than what it could be if they had not wasted money on Denuvo.
 

brucek

Posts: 651   +833
TechSpot Elite
I'm surprised there's that many people to be influenced by DRM. People who can't or won't pay, still can't or won't. People who are happy to pay to support the titles and publishers they love, will. How many people really exist in that window where they will pirate in X days as soon as the crack as available, but also will pay full price to get the game X days sooner?
 

Theinsanegamer

Posts: 2,146   +2,804
I'm surprised there's that many people to be influenced by DRM. People who can't or won't pay, still can't or won't. People who are happy to pay to support the titles and publishers they love, will. How many people really exist in that window where they will pirate in X days as soon as the crack as available, but also will pay full price to get the game X days sooner?
There's almost nobody in that venn diagram. There is almost no evidence whatsoever that DRM helps sales.

The onyl real evidence comes from the original Witcher, which sold noticeably better once it went DRM free and saw much less piracy. It was the founding block for CDPR to create GOG.com.

DRM only punishes customers. Otherwise it is utterly worthless.
 

yRaz

Posts: 3,503   +3,247
It's very obvious by the quality of the released product, that crytec didn't have a big budget for this remaster.
Considering that there are mods better than this remaster, speaks volumes to the lack of effort in making this remaster.
Wasting this much money on denuvo, just took out a big chunk of the initial budget.
This condemned this game to be much worse than what it could be if they had not wasted money on Denuvo.
I can't really tell the difference between the remaster and the original aside from the fact that my 1070ti can't run it. Even cranking it up to "can it run crysis" levels, I still think the game looks like something that came out to 08-09.

Instead, I have to play it on medium for it to be playable at all. I remember maxing out the original on my GTX 580, the remaster is useless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Theinsanegamer

Theinsanegamer

Posts: 2,146   +2,804
If I was a software company, I’d put in a clause that gets me at least a partial refund if my product is pirated within a certain amount of time...
Denuvo's big selling point at one time was exactly that, you got a refund if your game was hacked before the guarantee date, scaling with how soon it was. Dont know if they still do that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: trgz

noel24

Posts: 671   +730
I remember I could afford both the game and hardware to play it around 2010 or 2011, I still remember It well enough to know I wouldn't want to pay extra for extra graphics.
Those classic games feel just stays with You, and You become disappointed playing Them few years later, even with improved graphics.
I kinda interested in what They've changed in Mafia 1, but on the other hand, I don't wanna know, if They butchered it for easy money. $25 today for Definitive edition is more than It cost when it originally came out some 20 years ago.
 

Eldritch

Posts: 289   +417
It's very obvious by the quality of the released product, that crytec didn't have a big budget for this remaster.
Considering that there are mods better than this remaster, speaks volumes to the lack of effort in making this remaster.
Wasting this much money on denuvo, just took out a big chunk of the initial budget.
This condemned this game to be much worse than what it could be if they had not wasted money on Denuvo.
They will not bother even without Denuvo. As in case of remakes Denuvo is there to paywall a inferior product which most won't buy and even nostalgic gamers will bounce off after trying.

Most remakes are cash grabs not just Crysis. Just upscaled textures and videos run through neural networks without any improvement to original game play and mechanics to adapt for times. I have hated every remastered so far, even the highly praised command and conquer remake despite being fan of original.

As for Crysis remastered, its available at all sort of legal/pirate sites but seriously who cares even to check this out when it has been obsolete for a decade? What some lighting and upscale texture gonna do?
 

KaitouX

Posts: 9   +6
Love how they paid that much and still got cracked.

Once that 12-month period is up, Crytek can optionally extend protection for another €2,000 per month.
So all those years old games are actually actively paying to still use this ****? Or maybe Denuvo changed their policy regarding long-term usage?
Furthermore, for every additional platform Crytek decides to sell its games on, it will incur a one-off fee of €10,000
I wonder if this also count for GOG/DRM-less platforms, or if it's only for each platform actually using the DRM.

I really think that if the publisher used this type of DRM, they should at least have the decency to remove it once it becomes useless, also to avoid stupid things that already happened like with some games that when the DRM used died and took the game with it.
 
Last edited:

pencea

Posts: 236   +197
Most remakes are cash grabs
You're referring to remasters. Remakes are completely different to remasters. Games like Resident Evil 2 remake, Shadow of the Colossus, Resident Evil Remake, Crash Bandicoot Sane Trilogy, Half-Life Black Mesa, Spyro Reignited Trilogy, Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes, Ratchet and Clank, Final Fantasy 7 Remake...etc are not just simple upscaled resolutions & textures. These games are rebuilt from the ground up with new graphics engines and sometimes even gameplay elements.

I have hated every remastered so far
Fair enough but remember not everyone has had the chance to enjoy those games at the time of release. Whether it's because they didn't own a specific platform, weren't born or were too young or didn't get the chance to play it.

The remasters at least gives new players or newcomers a chance to play these classics/popular games on modern hardware.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CybaGirl

Eldritch

Posts: 289   +417
You're referring to remasters. Remakes are completely different to remasters. Games like Resident Evil 2 remake, Shadow of the Colossus, Resident Evil Remake, Crash Bandicoot Sane Trilogy, Half-Life Black Mesa, Spyro Reignited Trilogy, Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes, Ratchet and Clank, Final Fantasy 7 Remake...etc are not just simple upscaled resolutions & textures. These games are rebuilt from the ground up with new graphics engines and sometimes even gameplay elements.



Fair enough but remember not everyone has had the chance to enjoy those games at the time of release. Whether it's because they didn't own a specific platform, weren't born or were too young or didn't get the chance to play it.

The remasters at least gives new players or newcomers a chance to play these classics/popular games on modern hardware.
Fair enough, most of the titles you quoted were from consoles so I really don't know much about them but it would seem that remakes on consoles are of better quality.
It's also a good point that new gamers may finally get a chance to play these games but then they should enhance the game mechanics to facilitate new gen and new norms in gaming. I remember playing startcraft, warcraft and C & C remastered (mostly strategy games which I loved) and Ohh boy did they dropped the ball on adapting, improving and upgrading.
 

Thanthan

Posts: 57   +103
Thats not a lot of money in company land though? I was honestly expecting figures an order of magnitude higher. Ofc its still pretty much a waste of money so theres that... But yea those fees dont seem egregious to me if the drm actually did anything. (People gonna pirate gonna pirate imo)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Digitalzone

ypsylon

Posts: 249   +103
In another news: all money down the drain within a day after release. And rightly so.

Seems like DRM companies are perfect cover for money laundering.
 

Kirby1

Posts: 51   +73
It's very obvious by the quality of the released product, that crytec didn't have a big budget for this remaster.
Considering that there are mods better than this remaster, speaks volumes to the lack of effort in making this remaster.
Wasting this much money on denuvo, just took out a big chunk of the initial budget.
This condemned this game to be much worse than what it could be if they had not wasted money on Denuvo.
The remaster is a joke on an optimization level but there are no mods for Crysis that do anything like what the remaster does. Saying there are better mods is just plain wrong. All the visual mods do is tweak the time of day and color saturation levels.
 

Arbie

Posts: 176   +339
All the visual mods do is tweak the time of day and color saturation levels.
You're right, from what I've found. But the so-called "Quality" and "Maldo" mods also add Quicksave to Crysis 2, which is wonderful.

Actually, they attempt to restore Quicksave. Crytek had, for some insane reason, deleted this key optional feature right before the game launched.

 

Digitalzone

Posts: 148   +84
The same arguments over and over. People steal when nobody is watching. That's why DRM. And they are also people looting in the daylight...
 

christiangeli

Posts: 47   +31
It's mafia , crytek shoud paid directly the 3 major hacking group to prevent it from release the title on torrent or direct download. Probably cheaper than DRM protection .
 

Jimster480

Posts: 119   +109
This is really barely any money for a company of this size.... DRM software is worth nothing. I wouldn't even code it myself for such a crap amount of money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sad33q9000

CybaGirl

Posts: 43   +21
I can't really tell the difference between the remaster and the original aside from the fact that my 1070ti can't run it. Even cranking it up to "can it run crysis" levels, I still think the game looks like something that came out to 08-09.
No issues with my GTX 1070, i7 4790K and 16GB RAM with everything maxed out and it looks awesome to me. Plus I have been streaming my game play online and without a single issue or frame drop.


 

yRaz

Posts: 3,503   +3,247
No issues with my GTX 1070, i7 4790K and 16GB RAM with everything maxed out and it looks awesome to me. Plus I have been streaming my game play online and without a single issue or frame drop.
And what settings are you playing at?