No-CD Hacks: Another casualty of the shift to consoles??

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Knight37 <knight37m@email.com> once tried to test me with:

> Myth was a fluke. It happened because a kazillion people thought they
> needed a multimedia PC with Windows on it and oh yeah, if you buy the
> MM PC you get Myth. A whole generation of casual gamers are born. But
> I bet most of them quit long before the "death of the adventure game"
> (whenever that's supposed to happen).

Erk, I meant Myst, obviously. Always screwing those game names up. 😉

--

Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com

Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 21:35:59 GMT, "DocScorpio"
<DocScorpio@stupra-spammeros.com> wrote:

>.....or maybe protection software is actually defeating hackers?
>
>Is it my imagination or are no-cd cracks, especially updated ones for
>patched games, becoming scarcer? There are no updated hacks in the usual
>places (GCW, MG, GBW, etc.) for two of the four games I'm currently playing,
>which has got me playing "swap the CD." Is it possible this is another
>effect of the shift to consoles.....or is protection just getting a whole
>lot better? Yeah, I know: install Alcohol or learn to hack. I don't care
>that much, but I am curious if this is the beginning of yet another trend.
>

I think it's due more to publishers becoming more aggresive about
No-CD's and threatening leading sites with legal action rather than
people not developing hacks. GCW went from a site posting files and
instructions on how to copy a disc to a No-CD warehouse to a refferal
site for Megagames. Nowadays you have to take your chances with warez
and carckz sites.

Lynley

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Lynley James wrote:

>Nowadays you have to take your chances with warez
>and carckz sites.
>
>

That has always been a major concern. It doesn't need to be. The
cracks could be distributed as source code that compiles into a patch,
and thus "relatively easily" examined to determine that it doesn't do
nasty things. It has always amazed me that they don't do it that way
since DLing a cracked whole file is so much more time/trouble than
getting a few k of source code. But then users would actually have to
learn how to run a compiler/linker and apply a patch. Oh well.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 18:45:47 -0700, Quaestor <no_spam@my.place> wrote:

>Aldwyn Edain wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 21:35:59 GMT, "DocScorpio"
>><DocScorpio@stupra-spammeros.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Yeah, I know: install Alcohol or learn to hack. I don't care
>>>that much, but I am curious if this is the beginning of yet another trend.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Some games won't even install if you have Alcohol120% on your system.
>>
>>
>
>Seems like that should be easy for the developers to circumvent. When
>installing Alcohol120%, the user should be prompted for their own unique
>idea for a program name, and all folders, files, reg entries,
>everything, should be named that instead of anything that others can
>scan for. So when some jerk game program starts looking for Alcohol120%
>it doesn't find it even if it is there.
>
>Will these games that don't install if you have it on there work if you
>install them first, then Alcohol120%?
>

Nope. IIRC, it scans every time you run the game.

Lynley

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

In article <Xns96399202B7C8Aknight37m@130.133.1.4>, knight37m@gmail.com
says...
> Gerry Quinn <gerryq@DELETETHISindigo.ie> wrote in
> news:MPG.1cca00c573af6231989ff7@news.indigo.ie:
>
> > What, like putting the CD in the drive and using a machine that's not
> > stuffed with piracy software?
>
> Sorry but CD-emulation programs and CD-backup software is not "piracy
> software" even if it can be used for such. There's a lot of legimate uses
> for it, like actually using it to back up things, or using a disc image
> so you do not have to swap CD's out all the time to play a handful of
> games. Got kids? If you did you'd realize the dangers involved in letting
> them handle the single source of media for a game over and over as they
> have to reinsert the discs to play games.
>
> A program has NO BUSINESS telling people what other software they can run
> on their computer. Do you deny it?

It doesn't tell you what to install. It just takes on different
functionality depending on the software environment ;-)

> If they are going to do this, they at the very least should have to put
> it ON THE BOX that they are "completely incompatible with the following
> software residing on the same computer" and list the programs they refuse
> to work with. Then gamers could decide if they want to support a program
> that tells them what they can run or not on their own computer.

That does seem a reasonable request.

- Gerry Quinn

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 05:46:54 GMT, mrlg <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

>... et al. wrote:
>>
>> Dunno if this is related, but i have (a localized version of) EA's 'Lord
>> of the Ring: The Return of the King'. Just checked and it has a
>> Macrovision SECURITY Driver 'SECDRV.SYS' at the base of the first CD.
>
>
>According to gamecopyworld, Return of the King uses Safedisk v.3.
>
>
>> I remember having some problems installing it this fall, from a CD-RW
>> Drive, but got it to work somehow and played ca one level but didn't
>> have time then so i uninstalled it.
>>
>> Since then i've changed the CD-RW Drive for a DVD Writer and when I
>> tried to install a week or so ago, the exe on the install-disc starts
>> but almost immediatly quits again without any kind of error message.
>> By the way WinXP has been freshly installed since then, so no leftovers
>> since last time and no trace of any optical disc burn or emulation
>> software.
>>
>> Thinking about putting in a CD-ROM Drive as a slave to try to install
>> from. If it is the DVD Drive that is the problem, would that help or
>> would the exe detect this enumerated DVD Drive in the registry and still
>> refuse i wonder?
>
>
>I think it would help. I'm guessing the DVD writer was blacklisted
>and that's why it isn't working. But as far as I know, just having
>the DVD drive in the computer wouldn't prevent an install as long
>as you weren't trying to install from it.
>
>If the game still refused to install, you could always disconnect
>the DVD writer temporarily while you install from the CD drive
>and reconnect it afterwards. Once the game is installed you
>can download a crack if you have problems.


This is the very thing that is pissing off most gamers. Because of
crazy copyprots gamers now have to know exactly what hardware might
cause a problem and then jump through flaming hoops to get the damn
thing working. In the end you just reduce the market for your product
as most gamers walk away.

Lynley

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Lynley James <lynley.james@gmail.com> once tried to test me with:

> This is the very thing that is pissing off most gamers. Because of
> crazy copyprots gamers now have to know exactly what hardware might
> cause a problem and then jump through flaming hoops to get the damn
> thing working. In the end you just reduce the market for your product
> as most gamers walk away.

/AGREE. I think copy protection bullshit has done more to hurt the gaming
industry than piracy. Guy walks into store. Sees game he might want to
play. Maybe even reads the box and does some figuring in his head and
thinks, yeah, maybe this will run on my PC, but I'm not sure what video
card I have. Takes the game home. Double clicks install. Maybe the game
installs ok. Double clicks icon. "Please insert disc 1". WTF. Checks and
makes sure disc 1 is in. "Please insert disc 1". Tries to take game back to
store. Store refuses to take it back. Guy throws game in garbage in disgust
and decides to buy a Playstation 2.

--

Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com

Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Knight37 wrote:

> Lynley James <lynley.james@gmail.com> once tried to test me with:
>
>
>>This is the very thing that is pissing off most gamers. Because of
>>crazy copyprots gamers now have to know exactly what hardware might
>>cause a problem and then jump through flaming hoops to get the damn
>>thing working. In the end you just reduce the market for your product
>>as most gamers walk away.
>
>
> /AGREE. I think copy protection bullshit has done more to hurt the gaming
> industry than piracy. Guy walks into store. Sees game he might want to
> play. Maybe even reads the box and does some figuring in his head and
> thinks, yeah, maybe this will run on my PC, but I'm not sure what video
> card I have. Takes the game home. Double clicks install. Maybe the game
> installs ok. Double clicks icon. "Please insert disc 1". WTF. Checks and
> makes sure disc 1 is in. "Please insert disc 1". Tries to take game back to
> store. Store refuses to take it back. Guy throws game in garbage in disgust
> and decides to buy a Playstation 2.

Yup. Plus I haven't see a computer that doesn't have a CDR, CDRW, DVDR,
etc, yet these "security" measures break the game because you have a
CDRW...what a crock.

The worst part is the industry doesn't get it. Safedisk, Starforce, et
al don't really do anything but annoy the legitimate consumer.

 

[Shadows]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

["Followup-To:" header set to comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic.]
On 2005-04-16, Quaestor <no_spam@my.place> wrote:
> Lynley James wrote:
>
>>Nowadays you have to take your chances with warez
>>and carckz sites.
>>
>>
>
> That has always been a major concern. It doesn't need to be. The
> cracks could be distributed as source code that compiles into a patch,
> and thus "relatively easily" examined to determine that it doesn't do
> nasty things. It has always amazed me that they don't do it that way
> since DLing a cracked whole file is so much more time/trouble than
> getting a few k of source code. But then users would actually have to
> learn how to run a compiler/linker and apply a patch. Oh well.

Usually cracks are a matter of taking the original executable or
the dynamic libraries (dll) and replacing all the machine
instructions that runs the protection code with a NOOP.

There's rarely any source code involved in the first place.

Of course there is nothing stopping people from putting a trojan
in as well.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 08:11:41 GMT, Knight37 <knight37m@email.com>
wrote:


>Are they using a specific software protection vendor, or something in-
>house? Anyone know?
>
>Not that I care, that much, I couldn't care less about those titles, but
>it's just another reason to drive away casual gamers when their games
>mysteriously don't work.

The games work they just won't install if the install detects programs
like CloneCD and Alcohol on your PC.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Quaestor wrote:

> Lynley James wrote:
>
>> Nowadays you have to take your chances with warez
>> and carckz sites.
>>
>>
>
> That has always been a major concern. It doesn't need to be. The
> cracks could be distributed as source code that compiles into a patch,
> and thus "relatively easily" examined to determine that it doesn't do
> nasty things. It has always amazed me that they don't do it that way
> since DLing a cracked whole file is so much more time/trouble than
> getting a few k of source code. But then users would actually have to
> learn how to run a compiler/linker and apply a patch. Oh well.

god forbid ;-)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Quoth The Raven "Knight37"<knight37m@email.com> in
Xns963A202F1C74Eknight37m@24.93.43.121
> mrlg <nospam@nospam.com> once tried to test me with:
>
>> I think it would help. I'm guessing the DVD writer was blacklisted
>> and that's why it isn't working. But as far as I know, just having
>> the DVD drive in the computer wouldn't prevent an install as long
>> as you weren't trying to install from it.
>>
>> If the game still refused to install, you could always disconnect
>> the DVD writer temporarily while you install from the CD drive
>> and reconnect it afterwards. Once the game is installed you
>> can download a crack if you have problems.
>>
>
> I've never actually encountered a game that doesn't even INSTALL for
> certain drives. I've seen a bunch that won't actually play the game
> when you try to run them, though. Are you sure Safedisc v.3 outright
> blacklists certain DVD-writers? Is there any way of using some kind
> of stealth program that would hide the DVD-writer when you played the
> game (or even better, make Safedisc think it's some other
> non-blacklisted drive, so it would work) and then unhide it when you
> wanted to actually use that drive?
>
> To et. al. - do you have CloneCD, Alchohol 120%, or any popular
> cd-cloning software installed? Daemon-Tools or other disc image
> software?

I think the hardware blacklist (certain DVD and cd writers) cause the game
to not install/work because the writers are capable of ripping the game
perfectly, including copying the copy-protection software.

--
I think animal testing is a terrible idea; they get all nervous and
give the wrong answers. - A Bit of Fry and Laurie

Take out the _CURSEING to reply to me

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Highlandish wrote:

> Quoth The Raven "Knight37"<knight37m@email.com> in
> Xns963A202F1C74Eknight37m@24.93.43.121
>
>>mrlg <nospam@nospam.com> once tried to test me with:
>>
>>
>>>I think it would help. I'm guessing the DVD writer was blacklisted
>>>and that's why it isn't working. But as far as I know, just having
>>>the DVD drive in the computer wouldn't prevent an install as long
>>>as you weren't trying to install from it.
>>>
>>>If the game still refused to install, you could always disconnect
>>>the DVD writer temporarily while you install from the CD drive
>>>and reconnect it afterwards. Once the game is installed you
>>>can download a crack if you have problems.
>>>
>>
>>I've never actually encountered a game that doesn't even INSTALL for
>>certain drives. I've seen a bunch that won't actually play the game
>>when you try to run them, though. Are you sure Safedisc v.3 outright
>>blacklists certain DVD-writers? Is there any way of using some kind
>>of stealth program that would hide the DVD-writer when you played the
>>game (or even better, make Safedisc think it's some other
>>non-blacklisted drive, so it would work) and then unhide it when you
>>wanted to actually use that drive?
>>
>>To et. al. - do you have CloneCD, Alchohol 120%, or any popular
>>cd-cloning software installed? Daemon-Tools or other disc image
>>software?
>
>
> I think the hardware blacklist (certain DVD and cd writers) cause the game
> to not install/work because the writers are capable of ripping the game
> perfectly, including copying the copy-protection software.

Why shouldn't I be able to play the game though?

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 09:54:16 -0700, Quaestor <no_spam@my.place> wrote:

>Lynley James wrote:
>
>>Nowadays you have to take your chances with warez
>>and carckz sites.
>>
>>
>
>That has always been a major concern. It doesn't need to be. The
>cracks could be distributed as source code that compiles into a patch,
>and thus "relatively easily" examined to determine that it doesn't do
>nasty things. It has always amazed me that they don't do it that way
>since DLing a cracked whole file is so much more time/trouble than
>getting a few k of source code. But then users would actually have to
>learn how to run a compiler/linker and apply a patch. Oh well.

That's the thing. Most people out there, even those with the
knowledge to use cracks, have little to no idea how to use something
more advanced than simply double clicking on an .exe. SInce Windows
made it easier to use PCs the need to learn to tweak and fiddle, and
thus learn about programs and programming, has gone.

Lynley

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Quaestor <no_spam@my.place> once tried to test me with:

> Lynley James wrote:
>
>>Nowadays you have to take your chances with warez
>>and carckz sites.
>>
>>
>
> That has always been a major concern. It doesn't need to be. The
> cracks could be distributed as source code that compiles into a patch,
> and thus "relatively easily" examined to determine that it doesn't do
> nasty things. It has always amazed me that they don't do it that way
> since DLing a cracked whole file is so much more time/trouble than

LOL, this is just hilarious. I'm hoping you're joking.

> getting a few k of source code. But then users would actually have to
> learn how to run a compiler/linker and apply a patch. Oh well.

Yeah, and non-coders wouldn't have a clue about what the source code did.
Think about how much fun malicious crackers could have then. Besides that,
even coders aren't going to arse themselves to go over source code every
time they want to install a game crack. Sure, it would be FUN, the first 20
or 30 times. And educational. But everyone gets lazy some day.

--

Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com

Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Lynley James <lynley.james@gmail.com> once tried to test me with:

> That's the thing. Most people out there, even those with the
> knowledge to use cracks, have little to no idea how to use something
> more advanced than simply double clicking on an .exe. SInce Windows
> made it easier to use PCs the need to learn to tweak and fiddle, and
> thus learn about programs and programming, has gone.

/sigh, some times I wish we were back in the good old days of 1984. 😉

--

Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com

Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

Aldwyn Edain <ae@invalid.email> once tried to test me with:

> On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 08:11:41 GMT, Knight37 <knight37m@email.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Are they using a specific software protection vendor, or something in-
>>house? Anyone know?
>>
>>Not that I care, that much, I couldn't care less about those titles, but
>>it's just another reason to drive away casual gamers when their games
>>mysteriously don't work.
>
> The games work they just won't install if the install detects programs
> like CloneCD and Alcohol on your PC.

But do they say that when they refuse to run? Do they say, "We have
detected that you have CloneCD or Alchohol 120% on your PC. Please
uninstall those applications if you want to use our software."

--

Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com

Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

James Garvin wrote:

> Highlandish wrote:
>
>> Quoth The Raven "Knight37"<knight37m@email.com> wrote:
>>
>>> mrlg <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think it would help. I'm guessing the DVD writer was blacklisted
>>>> and that's why it isn't working. But as far as I know, just having
>>>> the DVD drive in the computer wouldn't prevent an install as long
>>>> as you weren't trying to install from it.
>>>>
>>>> If the game still refused to install, you could always disconnect
>>>> the DVD writer temporarily while you install from the CD drive
>>>> and reconnect it afterwards. Once the game is installed you
>>>> can download a crack if you have problems.
>>>
>>> I've never actually encountered a game that doesn't even INSTALL for
>>> certain drives. I've seen a bunch that won't actually play the game
>>> when you try to run them, though. Are you sure Safedisc v.3 outright
>>> blacklists certain DVD-writers? Is there any way of using some kind
>>> of stealth program that would hide the DVD-writer when you played the
>>> game (or even better, make Safedisc think it's some other
>>> non-blacklisted drive, so it would work) and then unhide it when you
>>> wanted to actually use that drive?
>>>
>>> To et. al. - do you have CloneCD, Alchohol 120%, or any popular
>>> cd-cloning software installed? Daemon-Tools or other disc image
>>> software?

Like i said in my first post:
"By the way WinXP has been freshly installed since then, so no leftovers
since last time and no trace of any optical disc burn or emulation
software."

>> I think the hardware blacklist (certain DVD and cd writers) cause the
>> game to not install/work because the writers are capable of ripping
>> the game perfectly, including copying the copy-protection software.
>
> Why shouldn't I be able to play the game though?

Ok, don't i feel ashamed for having to write this ..
But first trying to to point the finger at EA, in the manual under
installing the game it says (translated to English):
"If you wish to install the LotR-RotK you insert the CD-disc in your
CD-ROM/DVD-reader and wait for the autostartmenu to open. ..."
They do not specify which CD. LotR-RotK is 3 CDs with two tucked away in
paper-covers marked 'Disc 2' & 'Disc 3'.

Now, i've installed other multi CD games before and AFAIR i've always
started with the 1st one. But after the responses to my post i tried
again and discovered, like i must have done when i installed it last
fall that 'Disc 2' equals 'Install Disc 1'. Installing via the DVD
writer went problemfree after discovering that. (Blush) .. Again.

Can't believe i'm the only one that has been fooled by this. Sure would
have been nice to get a little dialogwindow after loading 'Disc 1'
saying "You must install the game first starting with Install Disc 1
(located in the Disc 2 cover)" or something similar.

So in this case no blacklists.

And back to the hack&slash-fest between cutscenes for me then, from what
it seemed the little i played it the first time.

--
Please followup in newsgroup.
E-mail address is invalid due to spam-control.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

James Garvin wrote:

> The Dells seem to have a better hardware config for Win2k/XP, plus out
> of the box they come with decent hardware (although the onboard sound
> is funky)


Or you can learn something about hardware, buy the best parts, and build
a far better machine for less money, something you can change as things
progress, something you won't need to throw away in 12 months.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

shadows wrote:

>["Followup-To:" header set to comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic.]
>On 2005-04-16, Quaestor <no_spam@my.place> wrote:
>
>
>>That has always been a major concern. It doesn't need to be. The
>>cracks could be distributed as source code that compiles into a patch,
>>and thus "relatively easily" examined to determine that it doesn't do
>>nasty things. It has always amazed me that they don't do it that way
>>since DLing a cracked whole file is so much more time/trouble than
>>getting a few k of source code. But then users would actually have to
>>learn how to run a compiler/linker and apply a patch. Oh well.
>>
>>
>
>Usually cracks are a matter of taking the original executable or
>the dynamic libraries (dll) and replacing all the machine
>instructions that runs the protection code with a NOOP.
>
>There's rarely any source code involved in the first place.
>
>Of course there is nothing stopping people from putting a trojan
>in as well.
>

I believe the way to do this type of crack would be to have a simple
program, distributed as source code, that reads from a data file of
addresses and puts NOP's in the file to be altered at each of those
addresses. Then to distribute a new crack you just distribute a file of
addresses. This way everyone can see what is being done, and "cracks"
would be very small, probably less than a k each. The fact that the
program cannot do anything but insert NOP's means that malicious cracks
are almost impossible.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

In article <Xns963ACEDA698C5knight37m@130.133.1.4>, knight37m@email.com
says...
> Quaestor <no_spam@my.place> once tried to test me with:

> > That has always been a major concern. It doesn't need to be. The
> > cracks could be distributed as source code that compiles into a patch,
> > and thus "relatively easily" examined to determine that it doesn't do
> > nasty things. It has always amazed me that they don't do it that way
> > since DLing a cracked whole file is so much more time/trouble than

> Yeah, and non-coders wouldn't have a clue about what the source code did.
> Think about how much fun malicious crackers could have then. Besides that,
> even coders aren't going to arse themselves to go over source code every
> time they want to install a game crack. Sure, it would be FUN, the first 20
> or 30 times. And educational. But everyone gets lazy some day.

Also, if the crack modifies executable code - and EVEN if it just
inserts NOPs - you really don't know whether it's a trojan unless you
completely disassemble and reverse-engineer what it modifies.

- Gerry Quinn

 

[Shadows]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On 2005-04-17, Quaestor <no_spam@my.place> wrote:

> I believe the way to do this type of crack would be to have a simple
> program, distributed as source code, that reads from a data file of
> addresses and puts NOP's in the file to be altered at each of those
> addresses. Then to distribute a new crack you just distribute a file of
> addresses. This way everyone can see what is being done, and "cracks"
> would be very small, probably less than a k each. The fact that the
> program cannot do anything but insert NOP's means that malicious cracks
> are almost impossible.

I believe this used to be done during the days of 8-bit
computers. Where you would release a series of C64 PEEK and POKES
to enable cheats. Also there were cartridges you could buy that
would allow you to edit memory and the exact offsets of important
variables for various games were released.

That kind of stuff. Only it was _easier_ to do this because no
one had Internet. Bandwidth for trainers and cracks came in
computer magazines and BBS postings.

BTW, what you're describing would be illegal under the DMCA since
it is reverse engineering for the purposes of violating
copyright.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On 17 Apr 2005 01:23:53 GMT, Knight37 <knight37m@email.com> wrote:

>Aldwyn Edain <ae@invalid.email> once tried to test me with:
>
>> On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 08:11:41 GMT, Knight37 <knight37m@email.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Are they using a specific software protection vendor, or something in-
>>>house? Anyone know?
>>>
>>>Not that I care, that much, I couldn't care less about those titles, but
>>>it's just another reason to drive away casual gamers when their games
>>>mysteriously don't work.
>>
>> The games work they just won't install if the install detects programs
>> like CloneCD and Alcohol on your PC.
>
>But do they say that when they refuse to run? Do they say, "We have
>detected that you have CloneCD or Alchohol 120% on your PC. Please
>uninstall those applications if you want to use our software."


They don't specify a program, rather a dialogue box pops up with a
message along the lines of, " This program has detected CD emulation
software on your PC, please uninstall before attempting another
install of this program." AT least that's what FarCry gave me.

Lynley

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

On 17 Apr 2005 01:21:58 GMT, Knight37 <knight37m@email.com> wrote:

>Lynley James <lynley.james@gmail.com> once tried to test me with:
>
>> That's the thing. Most people out there, even those with the
>> knowledge to use cracks, have little to no idea how to use something
>> more advanced than simply double clicking on an .exe. SInce Windows
>> made it easier to use PCs the need to learn to tweak and fiddle, and
>> thus learn about programs and programming, has gone.
>
>/sigh, some times I wish we were back in the good old days of 1984. 😉

AS much as I comlained about DOS back in the day, I do actually miss
it. Having to config sound drivers was just so much fun.

Lynley :O)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.strategic (More info?)

"Lynley James" <lynley.james@gmail.com> wrote in message
news😛6q461l54e4ff7625rinmll8u0bio3ma1l@4ax.com...

> AS much as I comlained about DOS back in the day, I do actually miss
> it. Having to config sound drivers was just so much fun.
>
> Lynley :O)

I too used dos back in the day, and to be honest still have a couple of
machines here that run it, just for the old games.

The only sound config I recall at the worst was select soundblaster, port
220, irq 7 and dma 1. Took all of 10 seconds.

Current shooters that autotest for compatibility take longer than that. Even
D2/LOD takes longer for its video test, and for every computer except the
one with a voodoo 3 installed it still recommends using 2d instead of 3d.