Fifa 16 crack 2018 Archives

Fifa 16 crack 2018 Archives

fifa 16 crack 2018 Archives

fifa 16 crack 2018 Archives

FIFA 16 Player Ratings: What You Need to Know

Another year, another FIFA. This year's FIFA 16 is a fine addition to the series with some big tweaks to gameplay. Delve beyond the obvious changes and you'll notice that the fine people at EA Sports have been busy tweaking the stats and numbers that every hardcore fan worries about, namely, player ratings. The way players have been rated has also changed, and this will definitely impact how you play.

What are FIFA 16 player ratings?
Notice that number next to a player when you select him or her anywhere from any game menu? That's their player rating. It's the single universal number that explains how good or bad a player is in FIFA 16 on a scale of 100. Obviously, those with a player rating closer to 100 are better.

So? Do a bunch of numbers really make a difference to how I play a game? Isn't this a game of skill?
Well. Yes and no. FIFA is still a game of skill, you'll still need to make the right passes, switch to the correct players and score goals. But much like how some teams play better than others in real life, some players will react faster or slower and increase the possibility of crucial moves like scoring a goal from a tight angle or pulling off a red card-free sliding tackle. In previous entries of the series, players with high pace statistic would literally run circles around others, effectively making other player ratings meaningless. This has been rectified this time around with player physics tweaked to ensure heavier, stronger defenders still have a chance against the faster players.

Which games modes are impacted by player ratings?
Every game mode is affected by player ratings, albeit in varying degrees. In an attempt to simulate real life performance, squads and their stats are updated weekly. This impacts the online multiplayer mode, called Seasons, tremendously. The initial set of player ratings affects the single-player career mode (which then updates depending how you play). FIFA Ultimate Team (FUT) and its shorter counterpart, FUT Draft are where the impact of player ratings are the most visible. However unlike Seasons that gets weekly updates, FUT gets a mid-season update on player ratings. Even then, EA does not reduce the rating of any player, rather adds new player cards based on their performance mid-season which may be higher or lower than their initial rating at the launch of FIFA 16.

How does EA calculate player ratings?
A lot of factors go into a player rating. Player performance is obviously important, but it is not the only one. The reputation of the player, team, and nation are crucial as well. Age as well his star power or popularity (how often he's won cups, what role he played) play a role in deciding the final player rating you see. Popular FIFA YouTuber Nepenthez has a great video explaining some of the many intricacies of FIFA's player ratings system.

But Mesut Ozil performed poorly yet he got a higher rating that last year! What's going on?
Every year, EA applies a different weight and priority to the aforementioned factors. And every year, a rabid section of FIFA fans will always have a problem with the final rating granted to a player.

In Ozil's case, he might not have had the best season but he's signed with Arsenal and his national team is Germany, both have a solid reputation. This is not all, he's on the younger side, and has won a lot in the last couple of years including the World Cup where he played an important role. All of these are why despite a perceived poor year, he still rates an 87, one point higher than last year's 86.

What's changed in player ratings this year?
If you delve a little deeper, you'll realise that player ratings aren't all they're cracked up to be. For example: a player like Gareth Bale has an overall rating of 87 while Cristiano Ronaldo is rated at 93. But comparing their stats side by side (using sites like FUTHead), you'll notice that Bale has a higher Total Stats and Total In-Game Stats compared to Ronaldo. This means that objectively, he's been the better player based on recent performances. But since overall rating takes into account national team reputation and star power, the fact that Portugal - Ronaldo's team, has a higher reputation than Wales - Bale's team, and that Ronaldo won the Ballon D'Or, gives him a higher player rating than Bale.

What do I need to keep in mind to build a winning squad?
With the way FIFA 16 plays, the strength attribute is important. We'd go as far as to say that it make as much as a difference as pace does. This is something you'd want to keep in mind when building your squad for online multiplayer, with a good mix of attributes, instead of just focusing on pace.

Squad updates, which occur weekly when you connect online, are based on real world events such as player injuries and weekly performances in their respective league. These impact player ratings in multiplayer mode. Depending on how good or bad a player performs or is injured, it shaves off or adds a point to his overall rating. The player transfers which takes place in January and August in real life leagues also decide which players you have access to for your team of choice.

In career mode, you might want to peruse through FIFA 16's hidden gems, a list of soon to be topnotch talent that's ripe for grooming into the next Messi or Ronaldo.

As for FUT, you need chemistry as well as solid player ratings. Chemistry refers how well your players get along and is indicated by red, yellow, or green lines. Red means poor chemistry. Yellow means middling chemistry. Green means good chemistry. High chemistry means better communication, tighter defence, and less chances of fumbling a pass or a shot on goal. Nationality, the clubs which players play for, and the nationality of the manager all contribute to this.

The underlying reason for all these little tweaks and changes to player ratings is that EA is looking to keep each FIFA game as close to its real life counterpart. It's an admirable, ambitious endeavour, but along the way, much like us, you'd begin to wonder how a simple game turned into a complex affair that's almost like a role-playing game.

For the latest tech news and reviews, follow Gadgets 360 on Twitter, Facebook, and Google News. For the latest videos on gadgets and tech, subscribe to our YouTube channel.

Related Stories

Источник: []
, fifa 16 crack 2018 Archives

Tag Archives: FIFA 16

all graphics and content are copyright their respective owners // copyright TBD Productions PTY LTD 2016Источник: []
fifa 16 crack 2018 Archives

Talk:Denuvo/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.


this article is nearly verbatim from the landing page of the company istelf. i am not intimately aware of ettiquette or procedures, but there should be some balance to the information with regards to independent sources providing additional feedback. i understand that the "controversy" has been debunked. still, is this supposed to be an advertisement for the software, or an informational article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:10, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Not a digital rights management

"It is not a DRM solution, but rather, Denuvo Anti-tamper protects DRM solutions, such as Origin Online Access or the Steam license management system, from being circumvented." -- (talk) 19:49, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

It actually is DRM, just because they say it isn't doesn't make it true and is just propaganda spouted by the company to make it more accepted by the masses who view DRM as evil. DRM is a term used for technology whose purpose is to control a person's ability to use the content/device in various ways, this use isn't just limited to the copying of it (which it doesn't have to do) but includes things such as the execution, printing, viewing or modification of it. In the case of Denuvo it's purpose is to restrict (ie: control) the user's ability to modify the content, specifically that of the executable code, and thus this makes it a DRM solution whose intention is to function alongside and protect other DRM solutions used by the content for other purposes (eg: copy and execution protection). Auscent (talk) 17:27, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Seconded. Whether they accept the DRM label is irrelevant. Denuvo qualifies as DRM. Ipuvaepe (talk) 19:48, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
I also agree. Furthermore, in the lead of the article, the use of Denuvo's website as a primary source is wrong. Secondary sources need to be used instead. - Uncle Alf (talk) 15:22, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
It's an obvious marketing strategy to avoid labeling it as DRM and avoid the negative connotations that entails. Denuvo itself (not any underlying DRM scheme being protected) requires an online connection to a license server to activate, that alone defines it as DRM in my eyes. Omcnoe (talk) 22:13, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 December 2014

This edit request to Denuvo has been answered. Set the or parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Denuvo Anti-temper has been cracked by a team of chinese hackers (3DM). They claim to have cracked the code of the anti-temper program (which was meant to protect the DRM that was protecting the games that used it) in 15 days, but that some work still needs to be done before a working crack can be released to the public. Arkhana (talk) 18:30, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 20:48, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

No files or specifications have been released and no games have been successfully cracked. At this stage it's still just an unsubstantiated claim. Pongley (talk) 22:11, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 December 2014

This edit request to Denuvo has been answered. Set the or parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Kevinj93 (talk) 01:28, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Already done The article already says "The PC edition of Grand Theft Auto V was rumored..."Stickee(talk) 03:48, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Why do you keep removing my edit?

Denuvo was indeed cracked by 3DM on 14,12,14.

Its quite easy to confirm this with a simple google search.

All articles in Wikipedia should be impartial in tone and content. Please explain your reasons for your continued removal of my edits before i have a chat with jimmy.

Why have your edits been consistently reverted? A few reasons:
If you make an effort to improve the quality of your contributions, your edits will stick.
Adraeus (talk) 13:07, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Grand Theft Auto 4

Please stop removing Grand Theft Auto 4 from the list of protected games. The article plainly states that Denuvo worked with Rockstar on Grand Theft Auto 4.

After publication, a representative from Denuvo reached out to The Escapist, saying that Denuvo will not be used in Grand Theft Auto V. "Denuvo is not in any way involved with any version of GTAV," said the spokesperson. Denuvo did work with Rockstar on GTA IV, however.

This source is reputable and cited. If you believe that Grand Theft Auto 4 does not use Denuvo, please find a source that says so and add that source to the article. Removing cited content from articles because of original research is not how Wikipedia works.

Furthermore, the source cited is used elsewhere in the article, so when you remove that source, you break the links to that source.

Adraeus (talk) 13:45, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

Denuvo didn't exist in 2008. The people behind the company - when it was still DADC Digitalworks, they were bought out in 2013 and renamed themselves Denuvo - may have helped Rockstar develop their own DRM but that isn't relevant to this entry. Pongley (talk) 14:07, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Denuvo did not exist at all back in 2008

No more proof needed than that. Denuvo was first released for any game ever in 2014, it's a huge margin of time there. (talk) 09:32, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Sony DADC & SecuROM

Should it be noted that Denuvo's predecessor, DADC, was the creators of the VERY controversial SecuROM, one of the most problematic DRMs out there? (talk) 11:17, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Unsourced additions

There is no source provided that Arkham is protected by Denuvo; even if "cracked" it is not apparent that it is this company's product. Foreign hacker sites and Reddit would not constitute reliable sources to justify such a claim - Assuming such a thing were encyclopedically notable, which they are not. Scr★pIronIV 13:21, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

For this reason I have removed Phantom Pain from this list (which was added earlier today). The only sources I could find were confused reddit and 4chan threads, and a single sentence on a warez site. I believe we should wait for reliable sources to show up before adding the game to the list. - Uncle Alf (talk) 11:01, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
More edits by other editors have been made since my last comment, again adding Phantom Pain to the list and also adding more information about the game at the end of the Technology section. For now, I have simply added "citation needed" to these edits because I have no desire to start an edit war. IMO, though, these additions should be removed within too long if they are not backed up with reliable sources. Input would be appreciated. Thanks! - Uncle Alf (talk) 13:11, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
Given the nature of the product and the completely unfounded rumour that Denuvo taxes the system's performance, nobody acknowledges it use besides EA in the beginning of the year. Unfortunately, in this case, the most reliable source regarding a game's usage of Denuvo or not indeed comes from the pirate groups and the news outlets that report on them. I think we should let those games that are reported by pirates as using Denuvo (and which subsequently take weeks to break, as opposed to standard DRM which takes minutes or hours) listed on the page -- even if we can't get an explicit acknowledgement from the game companies -- and only remove them if the clearly say they have not used it. It's not like people are going around making up games protected by Denuvo. -- (talk) 01:33, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
That is the opposite of what an encyclopedia does. If the most reliable source is not a reliable source per WP:RS then it must be omitted by policy. Scr★pIronIV 12:18, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
@ScrapIronIV: I agree completely. Unfortunately, several (anonymous) editors keep adding Phantom Pain and Mad Max to the list of protected games. The fact is that these games are only rumored to use Denuvo. No sources are provided for these edits. As far as I can tell these edits are all being made in good faith. I'm not quite sure where to go from here (other than start an edit war, which is not a solution, obviously) because the edits don't seem to be made by a single user.
Well, we have invited to discuss, and held some discussion. The trouble is that, even if a local consensus formed to include these (which it hasn't), such a local consensus cannot trump Wikipedia community standards. The standards are clear. I hate to bug admins for this sort of thing, and I wouldn't take it to AIV because I don't think it's vandalism. I am also at a loss. Scr★pIronIV 17:57, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
I understand. Thanks for keeping an eye on the article. I will also keep it on my watchlist. - Uncle Alf (talk) 20:16, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Someone here could contact Denuvo and politely ask for a confirmation of the games they've worked on. Unless they signed NDA with all the companies they provide services to, they may answer it. -- (talk) 20:22, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
That's not how this works. That would constitute WP:OR and also be a WP:PRIMARY source. The first is a violation of Wikipedia policy, and the second is not a preferred source. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a hacker review site. There are plenty of blogs and forums where you can post this sort of information without pesky rules and standards. Scr★pIronIV 20:34, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Fair enough. Then you might consider contacting the admins or voting about locking this page to unregistered users, however that process works. I don't see the rumoured additions stopping anytime soon -- everytime someone googles Denuvo and finds this page lacks Arkham Knight, Mad Max and MGSV, they'll keep adding it ad aeternum based on rumours. -- (talk) 01:44, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
I've made a request for protection. - Uncle Alf (talk) 10:35, 3 September 2015 (UTC) this is a source for lord fallen, battlefield hardline and batman arkham knight, and it's already in the list of references

Semi-protected edit request on 4 September 2015

This edit request to Denuvo has been answered. Set the or parameter to no to reactivate your request.

List of protected games

The only game officially acknowledged to use Denuvo Anti-Tamper is Battlefield Hardline.[1]

Other games that reportedly use Denuvo Anti-Tamper include:

Wingywolf (talk) 17:10, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Not done:. Not in sources given. Inomyabcs (talk) 13:22, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 September 2015

This edit request to Denuvo has been answered. Set the or parameter to no to reactivate your request. (talk) 07:47, 9 September 2015 (UTC) There are many new updates for this page : New games use Denuvo : Metal Gear Solid V The Phantom Pain,Mad Max... 3DM cracked again Denuvo in the game Metal Gear Solid V The Phantom Pain on 08/09/2015 So,please let me edit it

Not done This is not the right page to request additional user rights.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request. - Arjayay (talk) 08:18, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 December 2015

This edit request to Denuvo has been answered. Set the or parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Other games that reportedly use Denuvo Anti-Tamper include: Just Cause 3

References [1]Matthew Jason Smith (talk) 05:30, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Could you please clarify your source? Uncle Alf (talk) 16:29, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Source is the EULA. This has been added. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 21:05, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Matthew Jason Smith (talk) 23:17, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

DENUVO = VMProtect

Source— Preceding unsigned comment added by Bot5151 (talk • contribs) 16:25, 22 December 2015 (UTC)


OK now FIFA 16 has been added. Unfortunately the source is a pretty poor one, an opinion on a reddit forum. Now I'd say that FIFA 16 is almost certainly denuvo protected, being that FIFA 15 has this protection. But the source is poor. And views on what should be done? --Jules (Mrjulesd) 04:55, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

fifa 16 has been cracked a few months ago. they used the demo version to get around it. > RSoldat, 14.10.16.

Update: There is also this link saying that it was cracked— Preceding unsigned comment added by No alone (talk • contribs) 23:51, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

I think it's safe to say that games published by Square Enix and EA (and maybe WB) will have Denuvo in the future, so sources for these, in my opinion, shouldn't be necessary unless proven wrong. I'm pointing this out as my previous edit which included Star Wars Battlefront (a game which has yet to be cracked and uploaded to illegal torrent websites for this exact reason), Rise of the Tomb Raider and Hitman (based on images found on the server for the Denuvo support website by Reddit users) got reverted

Wikipedia sources need to be reliable. See Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. It's a site wide policy. Unfortunately sources on forums aren't seen as reliable sources, so they were removed. And that subreddit wasn't a support website, it was Wikipedia policy is based on WP:Verifiability rather than what might or might not be true, in other words could someone theoretically check that any facts came from a reliable source. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 04:01, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Noted, and found a valid source for Battlefront - ShadowStealer7 (talk) 07:54, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Denuvo. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

YAn editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:59, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Requested semi-protection

Requested semi-protection as much vandalism occurring from numerous IP/new editors. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 13:59, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 August 2016

This edit request to Denuvo has been answered. Set the or parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Rise Of The Tomb Raider, another Denuvo game, is also believed to be cracked at this time. (talk) 07:00, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — Andy W. (talk ·ctb) 15:50, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 August 2016

This edit request to Denuvo has been answered. Set the or parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Add a column in the table with heading "Cracked" and mark the games with X and a tick. Update info- Rise of the Tomb Raider and Doom were cracked in august 2016 by bulgarian hacker Voksi. (talk) 10:35, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article.
Moreover, I think such a change as adding a column, would need consensus. - Arjayay (talk) 10:54, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
Can't you use google?
Do you also need someone else's consensus to go to the bathroom? Either do it or do not do it- just says Yes or No- don't give me this "democracy" crap.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:00, 9 August 2016‎ (UTC)
This "democracy crap" is what keeps Wikipedia from turning into a circus. --MorbidEntree - (Talk to me! (っ◕‿◕)っ♥)(please reply using {{ping}}) 08:21, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

In the Denuvo#List of Denuvo games section, it lists whether or not each game has been cracked. But "Yes" is colored green and "No" is colored red, which has the connotation that it's better if a game is cracked. While I personally do believe that's better, it seems like it could be a POV issue, considering many disagree as to whether or not it's better for a game to be cracked.

I've actually noticed this before with other things, how it could be a POV issue, but in those cases it's always one option that's obviously preferable (like in lists of software, preferring having a feature over not having it, or preferring free over proprietary). This isn't the case here, however.

After I found this article through Reddit and immediately noticed this issue myself, I went back to the comments and the top comment mentions it. So there's more discussion over there.

flarn2006 [utc] time: 00:51, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Someone removed the "cracked" column because it "helps piracy", which I felt was rather silly (if you want lists of what's cracked, it's not difficult to find elsewhere). I reverted that since Denuvo is supposed to be "impossible to crack", so noting which titles have, in fact, been cracked is notable enough to remain on the wiki page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2620:0:2820:2208:86A6:C8FF:FEDA:2F64 (talk) 01:30, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
I'm not saying the issue is that it lists whether or not games are cracked. That's valuable information to have. I'm saying the issue is the color coding it uses. Green and red, when used together in a color code, have positive and negative connotations respectively. So using green for "yes" and red for "no" gives the implication that a game being cracked is preferable to it not being cracked. While I personally do think that's preferable, Wikipedia isn't supposed to take sides on issues like this, even with subtle implications like that. flarn2006 [utc] time: 01:40, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
Agree, made the change. – Steel 19:36, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Usage of "Yes" vs "Bypassed"

As far as I am aware, no existing crack has actually been able to completely remove Denuvo from a title. They are all simply bypasses or exploits of the activation logic. So what is the purpose of having a separate value of "Bypassed". Either all the existing "Yes" should be changed to "Bypassed", or "Bypassed" should be changed to "Yes". Omcnoe (talk) 00:33, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Definitely yes. As Denuvo hasn't been removed in any of the actual cracks, "Yes" should be replaced to "Bypass" (I did a wrong edit putting the Bypass in the middle, I apologize). And I would personally keep the list simple: If it's cracked with the lastest version, yes, if not, no. Ikobia (talk) 15:56, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Would that not change the entire list to no's then? Are most of the existing cracks not for older versions of the games, with activation bugs that have now been patched out? Omcnoe (talk) 00:46, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
All of the reliable sources do not make this distinction between cracking and bypassing. They call it "cracked" and so should we. If you think the distinction is relevant for discussion, we could add a sentence or two to the text discussing the differences (based on reliable source reporting). But we should not go against the popular usage of "cracked" as used by all the reliable sources. --Odie5533 (talk) 19:56, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
I agree, there are many examples of "cracks" for other software where the DRM is still actually running, doing activation checks etc. So the distinction is not useful. But it seems that people keep insisting on editing the page to change "Yes"'s to "Bypassed" (Which isn't a useful distinction), so I thought it best to have something on the talk page. Omcnoe (talk) 04:01, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
Agree, restored to yes/no. – Steel 19:36, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 September 2016


  • If you would like to suggest a change, please say what the change is rather than posting the article to the talk page. --Odie5533 (talk) 07:11, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 October 2016

This edit request to Denuvo has been answered. Set the or parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Cmon dont glorify denuvo.. just fucking update the crack status Anno, mirrors edge are cracked... Vishnu MS (talk) 20:49, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. EvergreenFir(talk) 22:20, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 October 2016

Hello. Damaged Core has Denuvo as well.[1] Can someone add it, please?

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. EvergreenFir(talk) 17:57, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
Here they are, all have the request code page: Damage Core and Dragon Front and Golfzon Driving Range. I hope I don't need to epxlain what request code page for Denuvo is... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lusht (talk • contribs) 06:45, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Toggling. Where exactly do you want the text to be added? Also, FYI, you are close to autoconfirmed, at which point, you can probably make the edit yourself without re-opening this. — Andy W. (talk) 08:08, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 November 2016

This edit request to Denuvo has been answered. Set the or parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In the opening sentence (and anywhere else it might appear), the D in “Digital rights management” should be lowercase. I’m surprised to see such a basic copyediting error on a semiprotected page. (talk) 04:24, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Done -- Dane2007talk 01:16, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Anno 2205 was cracked right, I saw people playing a cracked version. (talk) 14:03, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Denuvo was added in Anno in the lasted update with the new DLC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zyfworks (talk • contribs) 08:48, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Someone falsely removed Anno 2205 from the list, thinking that Denuvo was removed, misreading the line that it was actually added. The quoted "cracked" version was actually the version before Denuvo was introduced. Since version 1.03 Denuvo is present and the game is uncracked (as of April/2017, most likely forever). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Not2341 (talk • contribs) 02:37, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 November 2016

Dishonored 2— Preceding unsigned comment added by Lusht (talk • contribs) 11:32, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

@Lusht: There does not appear to be any information at the link you provided, and it’s not clear what you are requesting. Also, it looks like you’re missing the {{edit semi-protected}} template, so no one was alerted to your request. — (talk) 22:02, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 November 2016

Источник: []

What’s New in the fifa 16 crack 2018 Archives?

Screen Shot

System Requirements for Fifa 16 crack 2018 Archives

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *