Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

PC Game Piracy Examined

17891012

Posts

  • AzioAzio Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    I prefer online authentication over a DVD check any day. DVDs are a pain in the ass to dig out and my DVD drive is unreliable. The Internet, on the other hand, never stops.

  • DeShadowCDeShadowC Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Azio wrote: »
    I prefer online authentication over a DVD check any day. DVDs are a pain in the ass to dig out and my DVD drive is unreliable. The Internet, on the other hand, never stops.

    Except why should you be required to have internet access in order to play a non online game.

  • DanHibikiDanHibiki Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Azio wrote: »
    I prefer online authentication over a DVD check any day. DVDs are a pain in the ass to dig out and my DVD drive is unreliable. The Internet, on the other hand, never stops.

    except when it does, then you're stuck in a cheap motel playing solitaire.

    sig_zpsf0994cbd.jpg
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    DanHibiki wrote: »
    Azio wrote: »
    I prefer online authentication over a DVD check any day. DVDs are a pain in the ass to dig out and my DVD drive is unreliable. The Internet, on the other hand, never stops.

    except when it does, then you're stuck in a cheap motel playing solitaire.

    Except I don't like to haul around the discs for any game I want to play around with me on trips...especially when those discs essentially carry a $50 value each, because if I lose them (or damage them) I'm hosed.

    I can do this all day.



    Really, there it makes more sense in every way (from the consumer's standpoint) to just pirate the game. Even the whole "buy it and get the crack" part doesn't make sense to me...if you're going to make me pirate the game I bought from you, why did I give you my money again?

  • AzioAzio Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    DeShadowC wrote:
    Except why should you be required to have internet access in order to play a non online game.
    Because I have the Internet and I don't want to spend 20 minutes looking for the DVD every time I want to play Barbie Horse Adventures.
    DanHibiki wrote: »
    except when it does, then you're stuck in a cheap motel playing solitaire.
    Download a crack then. I don't want to carry around a CD binder. Besides, I thought the common consensus here is that gaming laptops are a waste of money and you're stupid if you buy one.
    mcdermott wrote: »
    Really, there it makes more sense in every way (from the consumer's standpoint) to just pirate the game. Even the whole "buy it and get the crack" part doesn't make sense to me...if you're going to make me pirate the game I bought from you, why did I give you my money again?
    Removing copy protection isn't the same thing as pirating the game.

  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Azio wrote: »
    DanHibiki wrote: »
    Azio wrote: »
    I prefer online authentication over a DVD check any day. DVDs are a pain in the ass to dig out and my DVD drive is unreliable. The Internet, on the other hand, never stops.

    except when it does, then you're stuck in a cheap motel playing solitaire.
    Fucking download a crack then. I don't want to carry around a CD binder. Besides, I thought the common consensus here is that gaming laptops are a waste of money and you're stupid if you buy one (unless it's a Mac).

    One can do a lot of gaming on a non-gaming laptop...shit like Civ4 will even run on something with a decent discrete GPU that might not otherwise qualify as a "gaming" laptop nowadays.

    And if I'm going to be scouring the interwebs for a crack, which will likely either come from a torrent containing the whole game (exposing me to a C&D from the publisher) or from some virus-infested site from crapistan (exposing me to...well, viruses) then again...why the fuck did I pay $50?

    I have a firm "pay or pirate" policy. Fuck that "and" shit. I'm not going to pay money for a game I'm going to go through the trouble and risk to pirate/crack anyway. That's ludicrous. At that point I'll either just not play it, or just pirate it. When I was younger, it was the latter...as I had less free time for games anyway, it migrated to the former.

    Then Steam came along, and now I buy my games pretty much exclusively from there.
    Removing copy protection isn't the same thing as pirating the game.

    I'm sure the publishers respect the subtle differences. Which is why it's so easy to find standalone cracks on legitimate web sites that aren't infested with trojans.

  • ButtcleftButtcleft Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    mcdermott wrote: »
    I'm sure the publishers respect the subtle differences. Which is why it's so easy to find standalone cracks on legitimate web sites that aren't infested with trojans.

    Is this sarcasm or are you serious?

    Because there are safe, legit sites. I can't say more than that for respect to the rules.

    that's it, I'm shutting this entire forum down, everyone thank buttcleft
  • AzioAzio Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    mcdermott wrote: »
    One can do a lot of gaming on a non-gaming laptop...shit like Civ4 will even run on something with a decent discrete GPU that might not otherwise qualify as a "gaming" laptop nowadays.
    Civ4 doesn't have online activation.
    And if I'm going to be scouring the interwebs for a crack, which will likely either come from a torrent containing the whole game (exposing me to a C&D from the publisher) or from some virus-infested site from crapistan (exposing me to...well, viruses) then again...why the fuck did I pay $50?
    There is a very well-known site, which has been around for as long as I can remember, that hosts cracks for virtually every game I can think of. It's maintained by the scene and does not host any viruses.
    I have a firm "pay or pirate" policy. Fuck that "and" shit. I'm not going to pay money for a game I'm going to go through the trouble and risk to pirate/crack anyway. That's ludicrous.
    Why? You get the game, the people who made it get paid, and you don't have to deal with the publisher's shitty DRM. The "trouble and risk" consists of opening a web browser, typing in a 17 character URL, finding your game on the list, downloading the crack, unzipping it to your game folder and playing. Nothing ludicrous about it.
    I'm sure the publishers respect the subtle differences. Which is why it's so easy to find standalone cracks on legitimate web sites that aren't infested with trojans.
    See above.

  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    *shrug*

    I must be a substandard gamer, because I don't know of the site you're speaking of. Oh well. Like I said, nowadays I buy it on Steam or just don't play it.

    Then there's the fact that even on a supposedly "legit" site I'm still running executable on my system from people I know little to nothing about, and the fact that those executables may well (as mentioned in this thread) introduce bugs into some games.

    This is hardly an ideal solution for a game I spent half a bill on.

    Also, I wasn't aware the Civ4 didn't have any disc/online requirements (I only have the Steam version). So replace it with "other random strategy game X" that will play just fine on a non-gaming laptop.

    EDIT: Oh, I see what site you're talking about now. Yeah, maybe it's just me or I suck at choosing mirrors, but their shit seems to always fuck up in my browser and crap. And while I'll take your word that it's free of trojans, it doesn't exactly ooze legitimacy.

  • Muddy WaterMuddy Water Quiet Batperson Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Aridhol wrote: »
    God! I just meant that a DVD check is one of the most minimal forms of DRM today and instead of complaining about it, he could be grateful that it wasn't worse.


    "It's not as bad as it could be!" is not a good argument. Be grateful I'm only kicking you in the shins instead of punching you in the face.

    I'm not saying a DVD check is okay. Hell, every form of DRM somehow inconveniences the user. Ideally, you shouldn't be hit hit at all, but when everyone else is punching you in the face, a kick to the shins isn't all that bad is it?

    edit: fucking made totp

  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Azio wrote: »
    Removing copy protection isn't he same thing as pirating the game.

    Yes it is.

    Copy protection is not there to make sure that legal games are legal. Its there to make sure that illegal games cannot easily be made. If you have purchased a legal copy and broken it you've done the exact thing that they wanted to prevent.

  • DerrickDerrick Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Azio wrote: »
    Removing copy protection isn't he same thing as pirating the game.

    Yes it is.

    Copy protection is not there to make sure that legal games are legal. Its there to make sure that illegal games cannot easily be made. If you have purchased a legal copy and broken it you've done the exact thing that they wanted to prevent.

    What? No.

    They wanted to prevent people from pirating the game instead of buying it.

    "The welfare of each of us is dependent fundamentally upon the welfare of all of us."
    Spoiler:
    -Theodore Roosevelt
  • DaedalusDaedalus Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Azio wrote: »
    Removing copy protection isn't he same thing as pirating the game.

    Yes it is.

    Copy protection is not there to make sure that legal games are legal. Its there to make sure that illegal games cannot easily be made. If you have purchased a legal copy and broken it you've done the exact thing that they wanted to prevent.

    Really? Because I thought that "the exact thing that they wanted to prevent" was, you know, people playing the game without paying them for it. If you've paid for it, and you're not giving free copies away to others, what's the problem?

    vvvvvv-dithw.png
  • DaedalusDaedalus Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    mcdermott wrote: »
    Then there's the fact that even on a supposedly "legit" site I'm still running executable on my system from people I know little to nothing about, and the fact that those executables may well (as mentioned in this thread) introduce bugs into some games.

    You don't know anything about the DRMed executable that shipped with the game, either, and those can also introduce bugs into some games (see also the Rainbow Six Vegas fiasco, where one of the official patches to solve a recurring bug was actually just a no-CD crack lifted from a piracy group).

    (In fact, when it comes right down to it, you know little to nothing about any executable to which you don't have access to the source code.)

    vvvvvv-dithw.png
  • AzioAzio Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Azio wrote: »
    Removing copy protection isn't he same thing as pirating the game.

    Yes it is.

    Copy protection is not there to make sure that legal games are legal. Its there to make sure that illegal games cannot easily be made. If you have purchased a legal copy and broken it you've done the exact thing that they wanted to prevent.
    So, you're saying it would be preferable for me to hop on torrent and steal the game, than for me to buy it and then modify it so I don't have to root through a big box of DVDs every time I want to play?

  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Daedalus wrote: »
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Azio wrote: »
    Removing copy protection isn't he same thing as pirating the game.

    Yes it is.

    Copy protection is not there to make sure that legal games are legal. Its there to make sure that illegal games cannot easily be made. If you have purchased a legal copy and broken it you've done the exact thing that they wanted to prevent.

    Really? Because I thought that "the exact thing that they wanted to prevent" was, you know, people playing the game without paying them for it. If you've paid for it, and you're not giving free copies away to others, what's the problem?

    Your actions that allow the removal of the copy protection for legitimate users enable the piracy.

    I mean, are you guys dumb. A cracked EXE that fixes a legitimate copy "fixes" an illegal copy as well.

  • AzioAzio Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Uh. We're not the ones writing the cracks. Scene groups are. We just use cracks so we can enjoy games that we buy on our own terms.

    And those Scene groups are mostly in countries that don't have shitty laws against this sort of thing so technically, they aren't pirates either.

  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Daedalus wrote: »
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Azio wrote: »
    Removing copy protection isn't he same thing as pirating the game.

    Yes it is.

    Copy protection is not there to make sure that legal games are legal. Its there to make sure that illegal games cannot easily be made. If you have purchased a legal copy and broken it you've done the exact thing that they wanted to prevent.

    Really? Because I thought that "the exact thing that they wanted to prevent" was, you know, people playing the game without paying them for it. If you've paid for it, and you're not giving free copies away to others, what's the problem?

    Your actions that allow the removal of the copy protection for legitimate users enable the piracy.

    I mean, are you guys dumb. A cracked EXE that fixes a legitimate copy "fixes" an illegal copy as well.

    Using a cracked exe with a legal copy of a game is not equal to, akin to, or the same as pirating that game. Period.

    steam_sig.png
  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Azio wrote: »
    Uh. We're not the ones writing the cracks. Scene groups are. We just use cracks so we can enjoy games that we buy on our own terms.

    And those Scene groups are mostly in countries that don't have shitty laws against this sort of thing so technically, they aren't pirates either.

    O.K. so now what you're saying is that using a resource that facilitates piracy is not the same as using a resource that facilitates piracy because you bought the game?

    Is this an ad supported piracy resource? Cause if it is, then you're actually just as morally culpable. But lets assume its not.

    Maybe you just don't understand what is going on. If you can crack your legal copy of the game, then someone else can crack their illegal copy of the game.

    Edit: or maybe you don't understand the original conversation.

  • DaedalusDaedalus Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Azio wrote: »
    Uh. We're not the ones writing the cracks. Scene groups are. We just use cracks so we can enjoy games that we buy on our own terms.

    And those Scene groups are mostly in countries that don't have shitty laws against this sort of thing so technically, they aren't pirates either.

    O.K. so now what you're saying is that using a resource that facilitates piracy is not the same as using a resource that facilitates piracy because you bought the game?

    Is this an ad supported piracy resource? Cause if it is, then you're actually just as morally culpable. But lets assume its not.

    Maybe you just don't understand what is going on. If you can crack your legal copy of the game, then someone else can crack their illegal copy of the game.

    Edit: or maybe you don't understand the original conversation.

    The scene groups don't get any money from ads on the third-tier websites where we mere mortals get our cracks. Seriously, do you even know how the scene works? They compete at cracking new and improved forms of copy protection faster and more thoroughly than other groups because they find this to be more entertaining than the actual game. Ad-supported websites, people selling bootleg DVD-Rs in China, etc., are several levels removed from the people who do the actual cracking and none of the money goes uphill.

    vvvvvv-dithw.png
  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Azio wrote: »
    Uh. We're not the ones writing the cracks. Scene groups are. We just use cracks so we can enjoy games that we buy on our own terms.

    And those Scene groups are mostly in countries that don't have shitty laws against this sort of thing so technically, they aren't pirates either.

    O.K. so now what you're saying is that using a resource that facilitates piracy is not the same as using a resource that facilitates piracy because you bought the game?

    Is this an ad supported piracy resource? Cause if it is, then you're actually just as morally culpable. But lets assume its not.

    Maybe you just don't understand what is going on. If you can crack your legal copy of the game, then someone else can crack their illegal copy of the game.

    Edit: or maybe you don't understand the original conversation.

    Using a resource that facilitates piracy in a way that does not facilitate piracy is neither piracy nor facilitating piracy. Like if I use an egg beater to hit you in the face I'm using that egg beater for assault, not cooking, even if the egg beater is fundamentally a resource to facilitate cooking.

    steam_sig.png
  • DanHibikiDanHibiki Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Drez wrote: »
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Daedalus wrote: »
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Azio wrote: »
    Removing copy protection isn't he same thing as pirating the game.

    Yes it is.

    Copy protection is not there to make sure that legal games are legal. Its there to make sure that illegal games cannot easily be made. If you have purchased a legal copy and broken it you've done the exact thing that they wanted to prevent.

    Really? Because I thought that "the exact thing that they wanted to prevent" was, you know, people playing the game without paying them for it. If you've paid for it, and you're not giving free copies away to others, what's the problem?

    Your actions that allow the removal of the copy protection for legitimate users enable the piracy.

    I mean, are you guys dumb. A cracked EXE that fixes a legitimate copy "fixes" an illegal copy as well.

    Using a cracked exe with a legal copy of a game is not equal to, akin to, or the same as pirating that game. Period.
    It isn't but I believe that it does violate most EULAs.

    I'm not entirely sure though because I never read those things before clicking

    sig_zpsf0994cbd.jpg
  • DaedalusDaedalus Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    The validity of EULAs is questionable even in the US.

    There's a bunch of case law that says they're not valid contracts, and there's a bunch of case law that says that they are. It's a clusterfuck, really. Much like most of American IP law.

    vvvvvv-dithw.png
  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    DanHibiki wrote: »
    Drez wrote: »
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Daedalus wrote: »
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Azio wrote: »
    Removing copy protection isn't he same thing as pirating the game.

    Yes it is.

    Copy protection is not there to make sure that legal games are legal. Its there to make sure that illegal games cannot easily be made. If you have purchased a legal copy and broken it you've done the exact thing that they wanted to prevent.

    Really? Because I thought that "the exact thing that they wanted to prevent" was, you know, people playing the game without paying them for it. If you've paid for it, and you're not giving free copies away to others, what's the problem?

    Your actions that allow the removal of the copy protection for legitimate users enable the piracy.

    I mean, are you guys dumb. A cracked EXE that fixes a legitimate copy "fixes" an illegal copy as well.

    Using a cracked exe with a legal copy of a game is not equal to, akin to, or the same as pirating that game. Period.
    It isn't but I believe that it does violate most EULAs.

    I'm not entirely sure though because I never read those things before clicking

    Maybe. All I'm talking about is the meaning of "piracy." You aren't a pirate if you buy a game legally and do something illegal to it wherein no copies are produced and no additional installations are made. That's just not what piracy is.

    steam_sig.png
  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Daedalus wrote: »

    The scene groups don't get any money from ads on the third-tier websites where we mere mortals get our cracks. Seriously, do you even know how the scene works? They compete at cracking new and improved forms of copy protection faster and more thoroughly than other groups because they find this to be more entertaining than the actual game. Ad-supported websites, people selling bootleg DVD-Rs in China, etc., are several levels removed from the people who do the actual cracking and none of the money goes uphill.

    And that matters because?
    Using a resource that facilitates piracy in a way that does not facilitate piracy is neither piracy nor facilitating piracy. Like if I use an egg beater to hit you in the face I'm using that egg beater for assault, not cooking, even if the egg beater is fundamentally a resource to facilitate cooking.
    except that you're using a resource that facilitates piracy to facilitate piracy. The company that makes the egg beater doesn't care if you hit someone with it, they still get the money when you buy it.

    The company hosting the piracy tools does not care if you pirate with it, they still get money when you visit their site. Money keeps the site running. Sites with piracy tools facilitate piracy.

    And you're all still missing the original point which was

    "to the company there is no difference between cracking it because you want to play the game you legally purchased and cracking it to facilitate piracy". Both situations end up with piracy when it gets out. The purpose of DRM is prevent you from doing that. If you can remove or circumvent it its failed.

  • TeaSpoonTeaSpoon Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Goumindong wrote: »
    "to the company there is no difference between cracking it because you want to play the game you legally purchased and cracking it to facilitate piracy". Both situations end up with piracy when it gets out. The purpose of DRM is prevent you from doing that. If you can remove or circumvent it its failed.

    Wait, that makes no sense. In the first instance, the company gets money. They've received the money already. It's in their pockets. They use it to buy lunch. It does not hurt a company when their (defective) product is altered to work the way it's supposed to by a third party product.

    The fact that more and more legitimately bought software is being cracked does not cause puppies to spontaneously explode. There is no inherent evil in causing your property to work better. Unless companies gain power from injured souls, the user being annoyed by DRM does not affect companies.

    Why don't you understand this?

  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    TeaSpoon wrote: »
    Goumindong wrote: »
    "to the company there is no difference between cracking it because you want to play the game you legally purchased and cracking it to facilitate piracy". Both situations end up with piracy when it gets out. The purpose of DRM is prevent you from doing that. If you can remove or circumvent it its failed.

    Wait, that makes no sense. In the first instance, the company gets money. They've received the money already. It's in their pockets. They use it to buy lunch. It does not hurt a company when their (defective) product is altered to work the way it's supposed to by a third party product.

    The fact that more and more legitimately bought software is being cracked does not cause puppies to spontaneously explode. There is no inherent evil in causing your property to work better. Unless companies gain power from injured souls, the user being annoyed by DRM does not affect companies.

    Why don't you understand this?

    Because the very "scene" you're supporting by cracking your legitimately purchased game is the same scene facilitating piracy of non-purchased games.

    You are supporting a scene that damages publishers.

  • DaedalusDaedalus Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Also, Gourmindog, I'm not sure what decade you live in, but in the post-dot-com-crash, you get money from ads based on clickthrough, not on views.

    vvvvvv-dithw.png
  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Using a resource that facilitates piracy in a way that does not facilitate piracy is neither piracy nor facilitating piracy. Like if I use an egg beater to hit you in the face I'm using that egg beater for assault, not cooking, even if the egg beater is fundamentally a resource to facilitate cooking.
    except that you're using a resource that facilitates piracy to facilitate piracy. The company that makes the egg beater doesn't care if you hit someone with it, they still get the money when you buy it.

    But I'm not facilitating piracy when I apply a cracked EXE to a game I legally own.

    Maybe you just don't know what "facilitates" means. Is that possible?

    Goumindong wrote: »
    The company hosting the piracy tools does not care if you pirate with it, they still get money when you visit their site. Money keeps the site running. Sites with piracy tools facilitate piracy.

    Uh...no.

    Goumindong wrote: »
    And you're all still missing the original point which was

    "to the company there is no difference between cracking it because you want to play the game you legally purchased and cracking it to facilitate piracy". Both situations end up with piracy when it gets out. The purpose of DRM is prevent you from doing that. If you can remove or circumvent it its failed.

    That original point - did you make it? - is wrong. And are you saying that the purpose of DRM is to prevent me from cracking DRM? LOL.

    steam_sig.png
  • DaedalusDaedalus Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Daedalus wrote: »

    The scene groups don't get any money from ads on the third-tier websites where we mere mortals get our cracks. Seriously, do you even know how the scene works? They compete at cracking new and improved forms of copy protection faster and more thoroughly than other groups because they find this to be more entertaining than the actual game. Ad-supported websites, people selling bootleg DVD-Rs in China, etc., are several levels removed from the people who do the actual cracking and none of the money goes uphill.

    And that matters because?

    It means that these scene groups would be cracking these games regardless of the amount of ad revenue received by (or indeed, the existence of) publicly accessible websites. You're using the word "support" in a way where it really doesn't apply.

    vvvvvv-dithw.png
  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    mcdermott wrote: »
    TeaSpoon wrote: »
    Goumindong wrote: »
    "to the company there is no difference between cracking it because you want to play the game you legally purchased and cracking it to facilitate piracy". Both situations end up with piracy when it gets out. The purpose of DRM is prevent you from doing that. If you can remove or circumvent it its failed.

    Wait, that makes no sense. In the first instance, the company gets money. They've received the money already. It's in their pockets. They use it to buy lunch. It does not hurt a company when their (defective) product is altered to work the way it's supposed to by a third party product.

    The fact that more and more legitimately bought software is being cracked does not cause puppies to spontaneously explode. There is no inherent evil in causing your property to work better. Unless companies gain power from injured souls, the user being annoyed by DRM does not affect companies.

    Why don't you understand this?

    Because the very "scene" you're supporting by cracking your legitimately purchased game is the same scene facilitating piracy of non-purchased games.

    You are supporting a scene that damages publishers.

    Except, as has been pointed out, downloading a NO CD crack from some site doesn't support "the scene" in any economic way. And it also supports the concept that CD checks and DRM is something consumers don't want. So if you want to look at downloading a crack to apply it to a legally-purchased game as making a "statement" then I see it as an extremely positive one.

    steam_sig.png
  • EchoEcho very gravitas Super Moderator, Moderator mod
    edited December 2008
    Daedalus wrote: »
    It means that these scene groups would be cracking these games regardless of the amount of ad revenue received by (or indeed, the existence of) publicly accessible websites. You're using the word "support" in a way where it really doesn't apply.

    Interesting fact: the actual release groups have next to nothing to do with various web sites and torrent sites. As a matter of fact, a whole lot of them hate it when their releases show up on P2P networks. For them it's all about the rush of beating the competition with a release.

    I know a guy that makes ASCII art for a bunch of groups. I hear some interesting tidbits via him.

  • DaedalusDaedalus Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Echo wrote: »
    Daedalus wrote: »
    It means that these scene groups would be cracking these games regardless of the amount of ad revenue received by (or indeed, the existence of) publicly accessible websites. You're using the word "support" in a way where it really doesn't apply.

    Interesting fact: the actual release groups have next to nothing to do with various web sites and torrent sites. As a matter of fact, a whole lot of them hate it when their releases show up on P2P networks. For them it's all about the rush of beating the competition with a release.

    I know a guy that makes ASCII art for a bunch of groups. I hear some interesting tidbits via him.

    Exactly; the scene groups (for the most part) would quite frankly love it if the general public would just fuck right off, because to them it's just hobbyist cryptology.

    vvvvvv-dithw.png
  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Interesting fact: It doesn't matter if "the scene" isn't operating those web sites[though earlier it was claimed that they did interestingly enough]. It doesn't matter if "the scene" hates it when their releases get out to the general public.

    All that matters is that it gets broken and it gets released.
    Drez wrote: »
    That original point - did you make it? - is wrong. And are you saying that the purpose of DRM is to prevent me from cracking DRM? LOL.

    No, the original point is that DRM you can crack is useless DRM. That there is no difference between cracking it to get rid of the CD check on something you bought and cracking it in order to distribute it across the world. Saying that its "O.K." if you own the product is stupid. Its just as much part of the problem as anything else.

    There is a lot of irony involved in the statement "I don't mind CD checks because i can just go disable them"

  • TeaSpoonTeaSpoon Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    What's so goddamn special about DRM that circumventing it is a sin in and of itself?

  • ButtcleftButtcleft Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Interesting fact: It doesn't matter if "the scene" isn't operating those web sites[though earlier it was claimed that they did interestingly enough]. It doesn't matter if "the scene" hates it when their releases get out to the general public.

    All that matters is that it gets broken and it gets released.
    Drez wrote: »
    That original point - did you make it? - is wrong. And are you saying that the purpose of DRM is to prevent me from cracking DRM? LOL.

    No, the original point is that DRM you can crack is useless DRM. That there is no difference between cracking it to get rid of the CD check on something you bought and cracking it in order to distribute it across the world. Saying that its "O.K." if you own the product is stupid. Its just as much part of the problem as anything else.

    There is a lot of irony involved in the statement "I don't mind CD checks because i can just go disable them"


    It makes my brain hurt that you can not fathom the difference between cracking a legally purchased game for your own personal use, and cracking a game to let thousands upon thousands of people download it for free.

    that's it, I'm shutting this entire forum down, everyone thank buttcleft
  • ÆthelredÆthelred Registered User
    edited December 2008
    Daedalus wrote: »
    Also, Gourmindog, I'm not sure what decade you live in, but in the post-dot-com-crash, you get money from ads based on clickthrough, not on views.

    Pay-per-impression is still fairly widespread, but I'm pretty comfortable with "enabling" piracy to the tune of 0.08c in order that I might acquire a no-CD crack.

    pokes: 1505 8032 8399
  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    Goumindong wrote: »
    Drez wrote: »
    That original point - did you make it? - is wrong. And are you saying that the purpose of DRM is to prevent me from cracking DRM? LOL.

    No, the original point is that DRM you can crack is useless DRM. That there is no difference between cracking it to get rid of the CD check on something you bought and cracking it in order to distribute it across the world. Saying that its "O.K." if you own the product is stupid. Its just as much part of the problem as anything else.

    There is a lot of irony involved in the statement "I don't mind CD checks because i can just go disable them"

    I'm having trouble taking you seriously. Either you're teasing me or your brain has been cracked.

    Let's deconstruct your stupidity one retarded fucking moronic point at a time:

    1.
    DRM you can crack is useless DRM

    You are either saying that once a specific instance of DRM is cracked (i.e. on my legally-purchased-and-owned copy of Smorgasborgle) it becomes useless or that once a type of DRM is cracked once, that DRM becomes useless. The latter is correct, which is why most people are concluding that DRM is a pointless enterprise. But I think you are saying the former which, while also correct, is laughable to complain about. As DRM has no positive benefit to the consumer and is, in fact, a complete hindrance, DRM is already "useless" whether it functions the way it is supposed to or not.


    2.
    That there is no difference between cracking it to get rid of the CD check on something you bought and cracking it in order to distribute it across the world.

    There's no difference between these two things? There's no difference between modifying a product I purchased because I want to use it more easily, without hindrance, and releasing a product to the world that allows pirates to deliver their trade more easily?

    Really?

    I don't even know what to say to that except that you are objectively incorrect. There is an observable difference between the two.


    3.
    Saying that its "O.K." if you own the product is stupid.

    You keep saying this without giving a reason. My reason is simple: Something I own is mine to do with as I god-damn well please. If I want to take Fallout 3 out of the box, crack the DVD in half, and wear it as earrings, then I can do that. And if I want to remove DRM on it so it doesn't look for the DVD every time I turn it on I can do that too. You're going to have to prove to me that that's wrong, or stupid, because it sure as shit ain't stupid just because you say so. You're going to have to supply an actual train of logical thought that supports your assertion, if you can.


    4.
    Its just as much part of the problem as anything else.

    Again, you equate cracking DRM to allow rampant piracy of something to modifying a single instance of a legally-purchased thing in my own home. This is an objectively invalid statement the way you have phrased it.


    5.
    There is a lot of irony involved in the statement "I don't mind CD checks because i can just go disable them"

    This I agree with - though "irony" is the wrong word - but not for the reason you are saying it. I mind CD checks even though I can disable them. I shouldn't even have to expend a joule of energy to disable them. But if I want to, I damn well will do it and proudly. And no judge is going to side with a company over a consumer over this issue, just FYI.

    steam_sig.png
  • EchoEcho very gravitas Super Moderator, Moderator mod
    edited December 2008
    Goumindong: would it be OK with you if I just cracked open the binaries in a debugger and stripped out the DRM myself, for my own personal use?

    If so, what's the difference between that and downloading a no-CD fix?

  • GoumindongGoumindong Registered User regular
    edited December 2008
    TeaSpoon wrote: »
    What's so goddamn special about DRM that circumventing it is a sin in and of itself?

    Nothing, what is so special about morality that everyone wants to talk about it when the question has nothing to do with it?
    Echo wrote: »
    Goumindong: would it be OK with you if I just cracked open the binaries in a debugger and stripped out the DRM myself, for my own personal use?

    If so, what's the difference between that and downloading a no-CD fix?

    Is it distributed?

Sign In or Register to comment.