Other

Opinion: Star Wars Jedi Survivor is a DRM Dumpster Fire

Well, here we are with yet another terrible PC port of a potentially great game. Star Wars Jedi Survivor launched today and it’s been a complete mess. A large part of the problem is the heavily restrictive DRM (Digital Rights Management) via the Denuvo. Denuvo is a highly aggressive and controversial system that PC players have complained continuously about.

Reading through posts on Reddit, performance testers have had Denuvo shut down testing after just two hardware changes. This makes it virtually impossible to perform any sort of testing on the games performance. However, that may not be necessary as players have been reporting abysmal performance on even elite hardware. Some have reported that their RTX 4090 GPUs are incapable of hitting even 30 to 45 FPS in this $69 to $89 game regardless of settings.

The development team has acknowledged the issue in quite frankly one of the worst “we’re working on it” replies I’ve ever had the misfortune of reading.

 

Clearly it’s the PC players fault for owning a PC, and there is no way to fix it. However, they’re still working on it so please don’t return the game and keep buying it. /S

Sadly, Jedi Survivor is just the latest game released for PC that is utterly broken at launch. Games such as Forspoken, Wild Hearts, Hogwarts Legacy, Wo Long, and The Last of Us have all had major issues at launch that in some cases, made them unplayable on the PC.

What’s causing this? It probably can be summoned up with tight release schedules and publishers pushing for console and not PC optimizations. That worked fine in the past when the PS4 was the performance standard. You can basically use a Pentium dual core and 750Ti to match its performance level. However, the PS5 and XSX both have 8 core Zen 2 CPUs coupled with GPUs that have gone toe to toe with RTX 2080 Super and RTX 3060Ti GPUs. In addition, they come with 16GB of RAM and high speed NVME SSDs.

Basically put, if developers don’t actually have the time to optimize the PC launches, the games will struggle. It’s not that these consoles are faster than high gaming PCs as they are objectively not. The games are just more optimized and there are more consoles sold which means more motivation to cater to them.

Is there a solution? None I can think of are good. You could boycott the PC release but then your hardware goes unused. You could buy the console version, but then you have all the limitations of console gaming. As for me, I’m just diving back into my Steam backlog and waiting the six months it takes to get these games fixed.

 


Well, here we are with yet another terrible PC port of a potentially great game. Star Wars Jedi Survivor launched today and it’s been a complete mess. A large part of the problem is the heavily restrictive DRM (Digital Rights Management) via the Denuvo. Denuvo is a highly aggressive and controversial system that PC players have complained continuously about.
Reading through posts on Reddit, performance testers have had Denuvo shut down testing after just two hardware changes. This makes it virtually impossible to perform any sort of testing on the games performance. However, that may not be necessary as players have been reporting abysmal performance on even elite hardware. Some have reported that their RTX 4090 GPUs are incapable of hitting even 30 to 45 FPS in this $69 to $89 game regardless of settings.
The...

Continue reading...


 
  • Like
Reactions: rfarmer

Skripka

Cat-Dog Perch Manager
May 18, 2020
464
571
I was just reading about this game and debating adding it to cart. Hate this crap so much. It literally only annoys legit consumers--the pirates already can download it off bittorrent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Revenant

Revenant

Christopher Moine - Senior Editor SFF.N
Original poster
Revenant Tech
SFFn Staff
Apr 21, 2017
1,741
2,833
I was just reading about this game and debating adding it to cart. Hate this crap so much. It literally only annoys legit consumers--the pirates already can download it off bittorrent.

DRM rarely accomplishes anything but making paying customers upset. Let's say I get this game with the current restrictions. I have a laptop, HTPC, and Desktop/Work PC. Depending where I am during the day I could play on all three. That would trigger the DRM.

Frankly, I wasn't much of a fan of the first game due to all the platforming. However, this just really makes me not want to give this game a chance.
 

Phuncz

Lord of the Boards
SFFn Staff
May 9, 2015
5,956
4,957
Never pre-order an unreleased and unreviewed product.
It incentivizes the companies to invest in marketing instead of developers able to finish the product in a good state.
Companies don't love you, they just want your money. It's up to you to convince them that your money is worth their product.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rfarmer

Elaman

Cable-Tie Ninja
Sep 13, 2020
155
119
Is there a solution? None I can think of are good
I must say that the 50.000 players mark on PC is very impressive, if we consider the price and the hardware requirements of the game.
I must have been living under a rock, but I have a more general question as to how is it that a Star Wars game is so popular in 2023 ... ?
 

Revenant

Christopher Moine - Senior Editor SFF.N
Original poster
Revenant Tech
SFFn Staff
Apr 21, 2017
1,741
2,833
I must say that the 50.000 players mark on PC is very impressive, if we consider the price and the hardware requirements of the game.
I must have been living under a rock, but I have a more general question as to how is it that a Star Wars game is so popular in 2023 ... ?

BF2042 started strong too, and died fast.

As for why Star Wars is popular…

1682773783432.jpeg
 

Skripka

Cat-Dog Perch Manager
May 18, 2020
464
571
DRM rarely accomplishes anything but making paying customers upset. Let's say I get this game with the current restrictions. I have a laptop, HTPC, and Desktop/Work PC. Depending where I am during the day I could play on all three. That would trigger the DRM.

Frankly, I wasn't much of a fan of the first game due to all the platforming. However, this just really makes me not want to give this game a chance.

The first one was all but impossible to play without a console controller....which at least you can get cheap ones on Amazon for PC. The first one also had strange quirks on ultrawide monitors.
 

Revenant

Christopher Moine - Senior Editor SFF.N
Original poster
Revenant Tech
SFFn Staff
Apr 21, 2017
1,741
2,833

37 FPS on 12900K / RTX 4090 Max Settings
 

Elaman

Cable-Tie Ninja
Sep 13, 2020
155
119
On the bright side, this further proves that the role of the reviewer is still very important. We can't just skip the reviewers nowadays in most cases.

Furthermore I think that thanks to reviewers, there will be faster fixes for this game, and Last of Us, etc etc. Hopefully you don't have to wait those whole 6 months...
 

nightshift

Airflow Optimizer
Jul 23, 2020
295
197
What is actually borderline offensive with the apology, is that there's no way anyone with their right mind would launched this game knowing that it runs like this. This implies that they either did not did a single test run at all before release (which sounds pretty surreal), or they knew it's going to be a disaster, but released it anyway.

While I couldn't care less about this game - from the moment I saw some gameplay videos with some stationary levitating Pterodactyl in the air conveniently at the end of a ledge so you can grab it's legs and glide through a pit. Stuff like this were in some early 2000's platformers made from some forgotten Pixar cartoon. Star Wars is not something to be taken seriously, but I never saw things like this in any movie.
Anyway, I find it very interesting how such a big company with an army of management like EA deliver results like this. How could they all come to the decision that releasing, dealing with the avalanche of terrible reviews and bad rep is a more suitable way to go instead of holding off and making it console only, then eventually releasing it on the PC a year later or something. God of War did this and while the game is nothing like it's name as now it's about petting animals (even trees) while talking to an 8 year old with a cutscene every 4 seconds - they eventually released it for PC with okay performance. The Last of Us was the exact opposite, it's also more like an interactive movie than an actual game (pretty much most AAA games are today) that came out for the PS3 in 2013 (so TEN years ago!) and still run like dogwater in modern PC's. In today's gaming, the bigger the name - the worse it's optimized apparently.
I think it deserves to be a disaster and buying it later after any fixes (if there'll be any) is a bad move as well, because it will reinforce developers that they don't need to make a game that runs properly as even if they're called out on their BS, the worst that can happen is simply to provide fixes and people will buy it. That's like stealing something and I only have to return the item and that's it. No punishment. If I can't actually suffer for my wrongdoing, then there's nothing that discourage me to commit crime again. It actually reinforce the method to try it whenever I can, as there's nothing to actually loose by doing this, but there's tons of money to save with simply skipping testing altogether. That amount can be described in numbers, can be shown to whoever, compared to previous year's budget and the conclusion is that this is the way. This is the standard now. Look at those numbers, hard to argue against that when people are buying the game regardless right?

And that brings me to this: why are people buying this game? As much as I want to point a finger to EA - if people are buying this game regardless, then ultimately they played a part just as vital as corporate greed as latter would not be able to happen without the former. I know youtubers have a tendency to benchmark with games that have spectacularly bad optimization - just for this reason. And the fact that they are used as benchmarks somehow places these games as high-tier - exactly due to how bad they run. It's ridiculous. Anyway - indie games ftw, next time, just don't buy such games that runs terrible as eliminating the market for such atrocities is the only way to combat these practices. Otherwise, it's going to be the standard and that will decrease the value of PC hardware too. If you buy your powerful gpu for 1200$ that should've been capable of running this on 160 fps, now you only get 35-40 for that money. It is in our best interest to fight against this phenomenon and staying away from purchasing them - changing those numbers that matter over at EA. That's the only way to get the message through.
 
Last edited: