Years ago, I saw a demo for a confidential gaming VM with the idea that games could ship with a whole VM instead of an anti cheat engine. Most of the tech was around doing it performantly. I wonder why it was never productized.

▲

tomrod 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

I'd imagine cost is a big factor. You have to contend with a lot of bad drivers on gpus, right? (This isn't my arena, just speculating here).

▲

kg 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

My understanding is that some modern game DRM does use an approach like that. See https://connorjaydunn.github.io/blog/posts/denuvo-analysis/

	▲	Squeeze2664 5 days ago \| parent [-]
		Denuvo's is a virtual machine similar to Java's virtual machine, in that it executes bytecode specifically written for it, within an application's process. I believe the parent post was referring to something closer to a Hyper-V virtual machine, an entire virtual computer.

▲

steve1977 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Isn’t that more or less what modern Xbox is doing?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_system_software#System

▲

dijit 4 days ago | parent [-]

Yes, the Xbox (since Xbox “One”; what a hilariously awful naming scheme) has software packages which are essentially Hyper-V VMs.

This was nice as a developer because we were not forced to patch our games when the overlay or underlying operating system of the console changed. In fact, On The Division 1 we shipped with a patched/modified version of the SDK- this wasn’t possible on Playstation.

Consequently, while the Xbox was marginally faster in a hardware sense, it was slower in reality. It even had the advantage of us using native rendering SDKs (Playstations OpenGL “with additions” was very much a bolted on second class citizen) and still we had higher quality and more consistency or our frame times on Playstation.

No free lunch.

	▲	abhiyerra 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		I heard the reason for it was to insinuate “XBox Won”