Ubisoft Steals 'No-CD Crack' To Fix Rainbow 6: Vegas 2 434
Ariastis writes "UbiSoft has long been against No-CD patches. Referring to them on their forums would get you warned or banned. But now, they have just officially released a patch for Rainbow 6: Vegas 2, which, when opened in a hex editor, can easily be identified as coming from the RELOADED scene group, not from UbiSoft programmers. A picture of hex analysis is shown in the story. See? Piracy isn't that bad! It saves you from having to code fixes for your own games! (Watch the drama on the Ubi Forums before it gets scrubbed clean.)"
So... (Score:5, Funny)
Presumably the patch has been nuked for Stolen.Crack?
Re: (Score:2)
Last time I ever download anything -Ubisoft!
DRM Hell strikes again! (Score:3, Insightful)
So basically ubisoft had broken their game with the CD protection DRM, something that nearly all games companies include, but I haven't the faintest idea why this is still a sane thing to do..
So now they have to use an "illegal" (or so they keep telling us) third-party crack to break their own DRM.
Or more likely, someone else's DRM that they purchased for a large sum of money, only to introduce bugs into their game and annoy their customers.
Sounds like great value for money to me! :)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why would it introduce bugs?
And of course they can disable the DRM. I would assume some of their developers was like "oh well I'll link the crack for those who need it" and well ..
Re:So... (Score:5, Funny)
The monsters!
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Two wrongs don't make a right, dude.
What cracks me up (pun intended) is the fact that Ubisoft have been UTTER BASTARDS in the past. If you posted complaining about Starforce on their forums, their employees would accuse you of being a hacker, a pirate etc... People get banned for posting links to cracks. HAVE been banned for posting links to THIS VERY CRACK.
This priceless, and utterly UTTERLY hilarious. A major software company relying on a cracking group to fix their stupid issues that their choice of DRM caused.
The only way this could be ANY funnier is if it was Electronic Arts instead, and even that would be pushing it as Ubi's attitude toward their consumers in regards to DRM is a hundred times more offensive than I've ever seen EA be.
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Regardless of what support the company has given its costumers, remember that the crack was made to circumvent anti-piracy schemes.
There wouldn't be any need for anti-piracy schemes if people were trustworthy and didn't steal software.
People use pirated software -> companies lose money -> companies invest in trying to avoid illegitimate usage of their software -> copy-protection schemes are put in place -> problems with copy-protection schemes arise -> people who don't give a shit about the fact that the software was a result of an investment in both equipment, marketing and man hours still keep finding ways to pirate the software.
So everyone uses cracks to go around copy protection schemes when they're not supposed to, and then when that company uses that crack to fix a problem, everyone is outraged. So it's OK if you steal from a company, but it's NOT OK if a company uses, to fix their own product and provide the support everyone cries for, something that was made specifically to target that company's product making it easier to pirate.
You know, people have worked to develop the product. Money has been invested. It's a company, it's supposed to make a profit, not to create software out of pure charity.
And no, two wrongs don't make it a right, you're right when you said it. And everyone should have thought that even if the company sucks at supporting its users (first wrong) that doesn't forgive anyone for pirating software (second wrong). I'm not saying that you shouldn't be able to fully use the product you bought. But does anyone here honestly believe that only the guys that bought the product are the ones using the crack? I don't think so.
This sounds like hypocrisy to me.
Just be glad that now that there is an "official" fix for your problems.
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, and people wouldn't need locks and car alarms if there were no car thieves. I'd still find it more than a little funny if every time you locked your keys in the car, you had to call up a car thief to open it for you. In fact, I'm pretty sure I'd be laughing my ass off, just like I am at Ubi.
How's that for a car analogy? :)
Actually... (Score:5, Interesting)
...had to call up a car thief to open it for you.
That happened to my uncle.
A cop showed up seeing him trying to break into his own car, hollered at some kids sitting in the grass by an overpass, and told them they wouldn't get in trouble if they unlocked the door. It was open in about 30 seconds.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Actually... (Score:5, Funny)
Couple of years ago, we had a party at our house, and some girls locked themselves out of their car. Roommate got a long piece of metal, and was in the process of opening the door of the car, which was parked on the side of the street, when the cops drove by. They stopped and asked if everything was okay, (they looked fresh out of the academy) and my roommate told them, "Its okay, I've been doing this since you were in grade school!"
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd mod you up but I have no mod points.
To the parent poster, the copy-protection shit to "prevent" piracy CLEARLY DOES NOT WORK. In fact, to me, it's a deterrent. I bought the Sims for my family and tried to burn a backup copy because I knew they'd scuff up the CD. Wouldn't burn due to protection on the CD.
What'd I do? Took it back to the store and downloaded a copy. Fuck you, EA / Maxis. They're grateful they don't need the CD to play anymore and I'm grateful I don't need to worry about it getting wrecked
While all this might be true and annoying (Score:3, Insightful)
I've used no-CD cracks simply because I could. But cursing a company for trying to stop piracy? Waste of energy and
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The main reason I haven't ordered "Spore" yet is because I'm waiting to see what copy protection methods EA use. If there is ANY chance of the game not working for me, I'm not buying it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Quite close, but it is even worse. In this case it is not YOU would have called the car thief. In this case you would have gone to "Ford" or wherever you bought your car, and the people at the "Ford authorized service" had to call the thief to open your car...
har har... I can just say that what Ubisoft did is amazing
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd still find it more than a little funny if every time you locked your keys in the car, you had to call up a car thief to open it for you.
Well, the more accurate analogy would be if locksmiths used tools developed by car thieves to unlock your car when you locked the keys inside. And guess what? They do.
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
A copy-protection must never stop a legitimate customer from using the product they've bought, though.
If that sometimes happen and the company responsible doesn't come up with a fix, that legitimize the creation of 3'rd party fixes, or cracks.
So even though the copy-prevention schemes arose from piracy, today, piracy is sometimes necessary due to copy-prevention schemes.
Re:So... (Score:5, Interesting)
Look at the music industry... Pay a lot of a drm'd music file that won't play in your car's mp3 player, or get a high quality mp3 for free? And what would you choose if both were free? What if the DRMd junk was free, and the mp3 was not? Amazing how the better product usually wins regardless of price.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
"Please note that Amazon MP3 is currently only available to US customers."
Here's why Amazon isn't an option for a lot of people.
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
I use no CD cracks on all of my legally bought games. Having to put discs in and take them out is kind of cumbersome when I have them all safely stored in a metal CD binder. If I wanted to switch through game discs all day I'd play my console instead.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I actually can't play games with the CD in the drive - my laptop slows to a molasses-like crawl whenever data is being read from the CD drive. This is true whether it's a music CD, a DVD, or a video game's CD. If I don't make a disc image and use something like Daemon Tools, then my games are literally unplayable.
Some might say it's my fault for buying a computer with this issue (as if I knew before I bought it), and others might say it's Dell's fault, or whatever - but while I find piracy morally wrong (
Re:Where do I find these? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't usually have any trouble with viruses when downloading from www.megagames.com or www.gamecopyworld.com. Still, I always scan the files first, and I'd suggest that anyone else do the same. Torrents are probably a pretty good place to look nowadays as well. Find the pirated game, but only download the crack. ;)
Re:Where do I find these? (Score:5, Informative)
The key is not to download cracks if you can help it. Instead, download mini images (on gamecopyworld.com as "fixed images"). These are disc images for the games, with copy protection intact, that are only a few megabytes large as they only have the crucial bits. Then, use a program like Daemon-Tools to mount the image, and you're set. This works for online games like Battlefield 2 as well, where cracks usually fail.
And as an aside, I actually had to do this to run Battlefield 2, as the copy protection apparently doesn't agree with my DVD drive (even though other EA games work). I emailed EA support and never received a response.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
remember that the crack was made to circumvent anti-piracy schemes.
And there always is a crack. Any even remotely popular game -- even quite a few indie games -- have their copy protection cracked wide open within weeks of release, if not days.
There wouldn't be any need for anti-piracy schemes if people were trustworthy and didn't steal software.
That isn't going to happen, so we have to deal with the reality that people will steal software.
Now the question becomes, what is the point of an anti-piracy scheme if it doesn't work? (See above.)
So everyone uses cracks to go around copy protection schemes when they're not supposed to, and then when that company uses that crack to fix a problem, everyone is outraged.
You're assuming that this is the same "everyone". You know there's more than one person on the Internet, right? More than one group?
Ubisof
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
There wouldn't be any need for anti-piracy schemes if people were trustworthy and didn't steal software.
You crack me up. No, really, you do.
Do you know who gets hit by those anti-piracy "measures" ? Not the pirates, that much I can promise you. It's the regular customers who have to deal with this, I'm sorry to say, shit. Pirates get a pre-cracked bug-fixed ISO downloads that just work. They also get game updates working sooner than those sorry fools who bought the game at an online download store (the legitimate kind, that is).
This anti-piracy bullshit does absolutely nothing to prevent, you know, piracy. It is not necessary.
People use pirated software -> companies lose money
BS argument #1. Let me bring a BS argument of my own ! People share software -> other people like it and buy that software, having had the opportunity to test it -> company makes more money than it is allegedly "losing". This argument is just about as full of holes as yours is.
-> companies invest in trying to avoid illegitimate usage of their software
By being good corporate citizens, offering excellent support for their legitimate customers, offering a better experience than "pirates" ever could and focusing on their legitimate customers instead of wasting countless development and testing hours on stuff that provably does not work and only annoys regular customers ?
-> copy-protection schemes are put in place
And usually cracked a few days BEFORE the game hits store shelves. Excellent.
-> problems with copy-protection schemes arise
PREDICTABLE problems. KNOWN problems. You don't think the QA department knows about these problems ? CARES ?
-> people who don't give a shit about the fact that the software was a result of an investment in both equipment, marketing and man hours still keep finding ways to pirate the software.
Why do you care about these people ? They are not gonna buy your software anyway. They might if they get a better experience for a reasonable price, they might not. In the meantime you are losing gazillions of customers to DRM issues, fixes for direct2drive issues that only exist because nobody bothered to check that the protection doesn't blow up on those releases, etc. -- good going.
People are gonna copy your stuff. You cannot make them not do it. This is a known fact, a fact that has been known for over 20 years. There is no copy protection scheme that has not been utterly broken.
So everyone uses cracks to go around copy protection schemes when they're not supposed to,
And scratching their heads asking "why did I pay for this shit, again ?" And making a mental note not to buy it the next time. Or, if they really want to play it and really don't want to deal with this ... shit ... Pirate it straight away. At least you know the scene guys have quality control -- when their releases don't work, they get nuked.
That is a very sad state of affairs. Pragmatically, you are better off using a pirated version.
and then when that company uses that crack to fix a problem, everyone is outraged.
Not so much that they are using the crack, moreso that they are banning people who previously talked about that same crack, should not actually be NEEDING that crack if they had ANY developers left (you see, disabling this "copy protection" is as easy as, you know, not applying the copy protection installer to the executable you get out of the compiler), etc.
So it's OK if you steal from a company,
Who said that ?
but it's NOT OK if a company uses, to fix their own product and provide the support everyone cries for,
Credit where credit is due, huh ?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
There is no copy protection scheme that has not been utterly broken.
Yes there is - make a product so shitty nobody wants to pirate it, let alone buy it. I hear EA is using this scheme these days.
Doesn't work. People are pirating reality show games. 'nuff said.
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
There is no copy protection scheme that has not been utterly broken.
I don't think this is true.
I do :)
Some high-priced software (e.g. CAD toolkits) ship with a USB dongle containing a CPU and part of the executable in encrypted form. In the course of the program's normal execution, some data is sent to the dongle, processed, and sent back. The dongle is designed to self-destruct when cracked open. This scheme is highly resistant to cracks, provided the part of the executable is well-chosen to not be recreatable, and typical attackers cannot obtain a large supply of dongles.
It is resistant and resilient, yes. I would not call it impossible, having seen what has been cracked in the past and what a decent financial incentive will do for the motivation to crack.
I have seen some of these systems first-hand over the years, always getting more and more intricate. Without fail, they have also gotten more and more burdensome on the regular users of the software. Want that "old" (2 years) dongle supported ? Forget it. Want that parallel port dongle working on your shiny new laptop ? Forget it. Want to exchange a broken one for a new one a month after the "service contract" that was tacked onto the "purchase price" expires ? Tough noogies.
Architects and engineers put up with it in large part because there are few or no alternatives that do not do the exact same thing.
Yet, you usually find a cracked version of AutoCAD in certain circles, anyway. In the above scenario, it really just takes ONE cracked dongle to get at the executable code. As for crackers not obtaining a ready supply thereof ... Why would that be ? These companies usually outsource to companies dedicated to making those dongles. Those companies, in turn, want to sell their dongles to other companies to secure their products. Naturally, those companies would like some samples, and possibly some development samples. If the stakes are high enough (a $20k software component that you can sell on the black market for $1k-$2k a piece if you crack it properly), why not set up a front company, get some of those samples, and work on those. You don't need to work on a "real" dongle until you have perfected your method, and you can get more than one "real" dongle by getting another one from the originating software company for the legitimately-purchased license (I assume these crackers will have access to a company with a service contract like that). They won't just say "no" when you say you lost your dongle on a trainride.
Not that I'm saying it's necessarily reasonable for consumer videogames to use such an elaborate scheme
It'll come. Right now Blizzard is marketing electronic devices designed to improve the security of their World of Warcraft logins by augmenting the regular username/password tuple with one-time-passwords generated by an electronic device. People are eating it up because they want to protect their accounts. I don't think it'll stay confined to securing online accounts ... 3-4 years down the road, you'll see some high-priced games sporting activation smartcards (or something equivalent). I think. It's madness.
It is crackable. The more user-friendly something is, the easier it is to crack.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
For smaller developers DRM is often mandated by the publisher. And the publisher doesn't give a damn about the developer or their game so long as it sparkles well enough to attract consumers. In the PC gaming world that standard is ridiculously low.
If you refuse to DRM, they refuse to publish your game and you make no money. And no, self-publishing is not a viable option for a lot of companies. Almost all major video games sell mostly on hype. If you can't afford a major advertising campaign and don't happe
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd personally trust many of these "scene" hackers more than I'd trust Sony to not to try to pwn my machine.
That's not to say I'd trust them that much
MOD Parent Up (Score:4, Funny)
I'd personally trust many of these "scene" hackers more than I'd trust Sony to not to try to pwn my machine.
I would trust a random stripper more than Sony.
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
When the price is zero the demand is infinite.
The price is never zero. My time has value. Figuring out that the tools I use for work are what is causing the game to ungracefully exit is a cost. Cleaning up the parts of the system that the game modified is a cost.
On the other side, finding a crack that works is a cost. Cleaning up the spyware from the websites that host cracks is a cost. Troubleshooting the buggy game with a boggy crack and no support because you have a no-cd crack is a big cost.
Re:So... (Score:4, Insightful)
When the price is zero the demand is infinite.
Maybe, but the price is never zero. Even if there's no monetary cost, there will be some cost or effort involved. For example, I have free fertilizer for the taking. The cost is that you don't want to drive out here for the sole purpose of picking dog crap off my lawn. There is not infinite demand for my "free fertilizer".
Want a better example? There's a bunch of music out there on the interwebs that I could go download for free, but I don't, because you'd have to pay me to listen to that tripe. There's also a bunch of software I don't pirate because I neither need nor want it (and also because I'm ethically against that sort of thing, but lets not cloud the issue).
Want an example that'll really hit home for the /. crowd? If demand is infinite when price is zero, why doesn't everyone run Linux?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Briefly: People mostly get it with a new computer, so they don't actually shell out anything for it and they don't know about the (often hidden) option to omit installation of Windows for cash. Or they pirate it instead of getting Linux, because that's what they are used to.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
"When the price is zero the demand is infinite."
That's a commonly expressed opinion, but it's incorrect. Just about any product out there has finite demand. If Ubisoft were to give away all their software starting tomorrow, I still wouldn't want any of it. If Apple were to lower prices on the iTunes store to $0.90 or $0.80 or even $0.50, I wouldn't buy any more of it. If Chevrolet or Ferarri cut their retail prices in half, I wouldn't buy one.
Piracy enthusiasts like to use this statement in an effort to p
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, so all piracy is of stuff by big media corporations? Really? How about small game developers [spidweb.com] whose games are regularly pirated? I guess they suck too, 'cause they aren't giving it to you for free.
Piracy isn't a "mass advertising campaign." A few pirating gamers might say something about a game to a friend or two. But the idea that that's more beneficial than getting paid for their fucking work is astonishingly retarded. (Especially given that said pirating gamer would probably just say to his friend "here, I'll burn you a copy.")
Rationalize it all you want: you're still fucking people over.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You get NO support from local stores, you get told to contact the developer or publisher, even for refunds.
But! (Score:5, Funny)
"Two wrongs don't make a right, dude."
Two wrights made an airplane!
Re:So... (Score:5, Informative)
CD cracks aren't just for stealing games.
One of the first things I do when I buy a game is download the CD crack so I don't have to keep track of where the install disks are.
I bought the game, it's mine. I can do whatever the fuck I like with it, including disabling annoying shit like DRM.
Re:So... (Score:4, Interesting)
That aspect of EULA's has never been tested in court. It's quite possible that it would be deemed null and void.
Re:So... (Score:5, Informative)
That aspect of EULA's has never been tested in court. It's quite possible that it would be deemed null and void.
Really? Because I seem to recall having this discussion with someone else on Thursday [slashdot.org], and pointing to a number of court cases where it has been decided.
You should also read the informative response to my post [slashdot.org] (since I was only directly answering a specific point and not attempting to cover the entire issue).
In other words, it HAS been tested in court, but courts are disagreeing on how to interpret the issue.
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
No, when I took the game off the shelf and gave the checkout chick the cash, the game became mine.
In Australia a contract for sale is complete when both the contractor and the contractee agree to the same terms. Both parties must be fully aware of all relevant terms before acceptance. Additional terms cannot be imposed after acceptance.
Re:So... (Score:5, Funny)
In Australia...
What do you expect from a nation founded by thieves and other criminals?
Hell, you guys made region-locked DVD players against the law, clearly your entire justice system is in league with teh pirates.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
What do you expect from a nation founded by thieves and other criminals?
To be fair, that only happened because England's other penal colony had a revolution.
I suppose the Australian government should be more grateful of the US and follow their lead a bit more when it comes to content industry initiatives?
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
No, I bought the game. If you had me sign a contract before I paid money for the game, then I signed the EULA. I can't sell you a hamster and, as soon as you get it home and put it in its cage, demand that you do *anything* else.
Copyright law states that you can't copy the disc or distribute it, but it does not tell you that you can't modify it. I realize the 9th circuit just bought into that, but I wouldn't be surprised of an appeal. And even if there is no appeal, I'd happily argue the case again in court.
You can't make me agree to a contract after the fact, and forcing me to spend money on gas (and that's no trivial matter anymore), and waste my time (which also costs me money) because I disagree with the contract you've given me after the sale occurred. The onus is on you to have me agree before the purchase is completed; once you do that, you're absolutely correct.
Maybe that's what game vendors need to do; provide an industry standard kiosk with the EULA present before the purchase transaction can be completed; that way if I find the terms too cumbersome, I just don't purchase it and don't waste the money or gas on the event.
Re:So... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Exposing themselves as a legal entity would *probably* backfire.
I'm just guessing.
How could they? (Score:3, Insightful)
Stealing the intellectual property of these crackers that they so rightfully deserve -- how could Ubisoft do such a thing?
On a serious note, is Ubisoft actually legally allowed to distribute these cracked executables, because they are of their own product?
Mind, I don't get why, because they would have the original source code anyway.
Maybe NoCD patches are the latest in the industry? (Score:2)
Warcraft 3 v1.21b patch didn't had any changes in the game except nocd, which was indeed very nice, one do wonder why it took them so long though.
http://pc.qj.net/Warcraft-3-patch-v1-21b-released-with-no-CD-feature/pg/49/aid/113191 [qj.net]
Re:Maybe NoCD patches are the latest in the indust (Score:2)
a) These things are so common nowadays that anyone who is going pirate the game can easily find one and
b) They save money in the long run by having to replace significantly less discs as they get old, dirty, and scratched.
Re: (Score:2)
But Blizzard doesn't replace them do they? Afaik they ask for money for a replacement disk :(
This is my TFT-CD:
http://cdcrack.istheshit.net/ [istheshit.net]
But I've borrowed a friends instead...
(On a mac ROC CD when you played TFT wasn't enough either, it's in Windows, fucked up because I hate looking for the CD and I never used NoCD crack once I had the original because I didn't wanted to risk getting banned from bnet.)
And no, I have no idea why they bother to check for the CD, it will be broken anyway so why bother about
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They created the no-CD patches to coincide with their "Blizzard Account" system which allows you to buy their games online and then download them. I'm assuming they wanted a consistent platform for all their users, and it doesn't exactly make sense to have someone purchase and download a game and then have to wait for the CD to arrive in the mail just to start it up.
Additionally, if you already own the game, you can enter your CD key on the site to gain the ability to download them directly from Blizzard.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:How could they? (Score:5, Insightful)
I found the article both amusing, intriguing, and irritating in that they're playing the games of the *IAA on the "theft" side.
What they have done is infringe copyright, which is just not playing fair. And for one of the "big boys" in the industry, who definitely do make money from releases, and continued patching (patches are, or should be, costed into the maintenance cycle of any computer product).
Legally, I'd say UBI are in the wring distributing the patch, as it is comprised of code they have not written. However, the cracker group would have to go and press charges to have this settled. And I'm not so sure they would be so happy to drop their facade of anonymity for this (all the companies that would love to know who they are, for the sake of taking a shot at copyright protection circumvention charges etc.).
As things stand, I don't think UBI will get the full legal hot water, however, they've just taken a massive PR hit, and the whole "holier than thou" stance taken by the games industry on copy protection has also been tainted.
As to why a patch has been released that's copied.. The no-cd cracks are widely distributed, so when they're 'mature', you have a very heavily tested patch, that may just fix an issue you need fixed. You can either spend ages getting the dev to identify the bug, work out how to fix it without breaking other things in the product, get a testing department to exhaustively test it to make sure it doesn't break, pass it through QA to make sure it's not affected any other things adversely, and have it passed backwards and forwards if things don't seem quite right.. Or you can grab some existing highly tested in volume code that does the job nicely.
Efficiency says that the second is the best option. However, to do that, they'd need the ok from the crack group, which the organisation probably wouldn't want to attribute on a release document. The joys of politics getting in the way of progress.
Given that they're not willing to attribute or deal with the 'pirates', then alas, their only option should have been to go their own way.
Methinks someone was a tad lazy and thought "it's all closed, who'll know?" without thinking it through.. After all, how does anyone work out how things have altered without going through patches with the proverbial microscope? You can pretty much guarantee that someone would find out the similarities...
Of course, there's also the option that one of the UBI devs is also in the crack group and simply reused the code s/he wrote in the first place, which would be even more interesting (and from an 'unofficial' aspect, probably more useful for UBI, as they can comply with uninformed investors clamoring for DRM, and at the same time slake the appetites of the masses who don't want the damned DVD in the drive as it's a pain in the arse! Best of both worlds).
The patch been pulled, over a week ago! (Score:5, Informative)
Someone was either being very lazy or thought it was funny. I'm glad they didn't censor the forums to hell and back ala Apple...
Last post from the now locked thread:
Re:The patch been pulled, over a week ago! (Score:5, Interesting)
Since I work in 3rd tier support now, let me translate that into human language:
The working fix was removed as soon as management of department responsible for actually releasing fixes complained very loud. The matter is being thoroughly investigated, but as of now no easy scapegoat can be found, since "fix" actually worked. Also, manager of sales asked me to retype here the stuff from our business booklet: "we do no support or condone copy protection circumvention methods." Nice. Gamers have to thank some poor chap from support department who put the fix up so that gamers can play the game they have paid money for, but please remember, since you already paid to Ubi, we can care less whether you can play the game or not. Ha-ha.
My theory would be that Ubi support manager had authorized that one of his subordinates would put fix on their site. Because they had a flood of complaints and they had to respond to customers. Luckily, support departments are least responsible for anything. Since it takes that long, the dispute between support, development and D2D folks really heated up. From my experience, I'd say, some manager had intentionally authorized that - just to have a chance to say something (probably about game quality) aloud.
This is awesome. (Score:5, Funny)
It's entirely in the spirit of online freedom that all who use cracks live by. It's also a quiet nod to the expertise of those who wrote the crack.
I think we should all take this as a good sign of further co-operation in times to come.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I heard story from friend whose another friend bought Pro/E, and could not install from the official CDs. Finally, running out of time, he installed cracked Pro/E right in front of their representative which worked like a charm.
Of course he has not asked for refund as he wants to keep the license to show, just in case.
Furthermore (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not stealing if the original programmers were not deprived of anything. Whether the good guys ("pirates") do it or the bad guys (the "content industry") do it, unauthorized copying is not stealing and never has been.
Is anyone really that surprised? (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps I'm a bit silly thinking this, but I have a lot of respect for the majority of the cracking scene.
Time and time again they've always proved just how talented and resourceful they can be.
I say props to them! At the very least, Ubi should sack whatever middle-manager that decided to release this as an "official" patch or lazy programmer that decided to submit this rather than build a proper executable and give THEM a job instead. I've had more "official" patches from both Ubi and EA (And a few others) break stuff than dodgy, pirate hacks.
Pot vs. Kettle (Score:2)
Wait a second. You're suggesting that Ubisoft should be taken to task stealing some cracker's hard work? Sounds to me like fair play. Why waste Ubisoft resources on making a patch when they can just steal one?
Re:Pot vs. Kettle (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not that they stole it, it's more that they couldn't be bothered to make an official one. .exe and checked it for irregularities or they'd have noticed the cracking group's moniker and removed it. That, plus it would have been easier to recompile a new one from the source they have.
I mean, when you think about it - what if that crack WAS dodgy? What if it had a time bomb in it that wiped out your hard drive after a certain date? I don't think for a second that Ubi disassembled the cracked
Of course, I trust the group but I know full well that if it DID have something dodgy in it, I'd be fully responsible for it and have to accept that it was my fault.
But in this case, Ubi could have been under some serious shit if such a thing had happened.
There's really no excuse, it's sheer laziness on their part.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Of course, I trust the group
why? Do you know who they are? where they are from? know the personally? You know who are current members of the groups, and what their motives are?
Personally I do not trust anonymous groups of coders on the internet who cannot be tracked down to run exes on my machine. If ubisoft format my hard drive, I have legal recourse against a known company. The same if my company trashes your machine. Your defence against some random group of kids on the internet is basically fuck all.
I'm surprised how much risk pe
Re:Pot vs. Kettle (Score:5, Insightful)
Reloaded has existed for quite a while and as far as I know they've never put malware in their cracks. While it's obvious there is always a risk involved when you run an executable (no matter where it came from), I'd say you are reasonably save using their cracks. Probably more safe than running DRM'ed software, since that software tries to hook itself into all kinds of important parts of you operating system.
Re:Pot vs. Kettle (Score:5, Informative)
Reloaded has existed for quite a while and as far as I know they've never put malware in their cracks.
No cracker groups of any consequence has ever put malware in anything as far as I know, it's 99% others using a virus-adding tool and distributing their own trojaned version of their cracks. Still, it's not easy to tell one from the other.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
They should really sign their packages.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
its always easier to break and destroy than to fix and create.
I'm sure there are some very talented people making nocd cracks. I wish those people would actually use their efforts to create good new games, rather than just encouraging games devs to spend yet more time and yet more money creating better stronger DRM.
We are all very impressed with their l33t coding skills. Maybe now they could do something constructive with them?
Re:Is anyone really that surprised? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That is probably the most ignorant response I have ever read on Slashdot. Did you accidentally reply to the wrong post?
Somehow I doubt you would be so quick to condemn players who ignored a requirement in the EULA that they play a game in only their underwear. Then again, after that staggering display of ineptitude, perhaps you would.
"If you don't like the developer's arbitrary clothing requirements, don't buy the game! It's their right to tell you how to dress while consuming their media."
Actually, if y
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The legality of the issue is totally peripheral to whether it is constructive or not. To use a way-blown-out-of-proportion analogy, the civil rights movement involved a lot of people breaking laws in a constructive manner. (Before I get a heap of people thinking I'm trying to equate the two, I'm not. I am merely showing that illegality and constructiveness are not mutually exclusive).
Considering that actually using a CD instead of a no CD crack leads to all sorts of fun issues like wearing both the CD and
Re:Is anyone really that surprised? (Score:4, Interesting)
I frankly stopped buying PC games. Or to put it better I have improved my game buying routine:
1. Go to review sites and pick game which has good user comments. Official reviews are written by some score-whores and rarely reflect actual gaming experience.
2. Go to torrent site of your choosing and download the game. If game downloads fast: +1
3. Try to install and play game. If it plays without crack: +5 (== the game is popular)
If crack is needed - continue.
4. Find a working crack. If crack is found easily: +5
If no crack is found or cracks are not working: throw away the game. If it wasn't worth time to crack, doubtfully it would be worth my time to play it.
5. Actually play the game. If game is good: +10
6. If games plays good (with easy to find crack), buy it.
Now it all boils down to simple fact: was game compromised with DRM or devels instead choose to make game better and not waste their time on crippling users' experience.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I frankly stopped buying PC games.
I stopped buying PC games in shops.
Nowadays, I fire up Steam, browse to the game I want, click "Buy", enter my details, confirm the order, go away, come back a couple of hours later, and play it.
This is a heck of a lot easier, especially as I can look up reviews while browsing.
Oh wait! I'm defending Steam. That must make me (-1, IDon'tAgreeWithYou), I suppose!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
License (Score:5, Funny)
Stealing? (Score:5, Insightful)
I can already see the torrent of people coming in to call all slashdot users hypocrites for calling this stealing but defending "piracy" as not stealing and all that, so I figure I might as well clear this up as soon as possible:
Thing the first: Slashdot is not one person, it is many people, so it's not inconsistent for vocal members of the community to call this stealing but piracy not stealing.
Thing the second: "steals" is still a bad word here. "Steals credit" would be better, if anything, but I still think the wording is bad anyway.
Thing the third: most pirates at least hold to the moral ground of giving credit where credit is due, which is clearly not the case here.
Hopefully this will head off those silly comments. Eh, who am I kidding, it's Slashdot. I'll probably wake up to 50 of them. Oh well, I tried.
Re:Stealing? (Score:5, Interesting)
I think that in the books of many /. readers, stealing credit is actually worse than stealing a product. Many people here have an academic background, so they are very familiar with the problems of credit stealing, few, OTOH, are in sales, so the problem of stealing a product isn't so much of a topic.
I have to admit, I'm in the same boat. Personally, I'd give it a shrug and a "turnaround is fair" comment when UBI simply said that they didn't want to reinvent the wheel so they just took an existing crack and used it for their own purposes. Not saying anything and claiming it as their own development is what irks me.
Re:Stealing? (Score:5, Interesting)
The label of 'stealing' is in the story headline itself. If Slashdot ran a story on music/software piracy with a headline labelling those people in the same way, I am sure there would be far more critical posts.
NO-CD cracks are what saves the gaming world (Score:5, Interesting)
Seriously. If there were no NO-CD cracks, I suspect companies like Ubisoft would make lots LESS money than they do now. I usually buy the game, download the NO-CD crack, and play. I'll never forget how the CD in my previous ThinkPad almost died from overwork before I saved it (and myself from going insane) with the NO-CD for HOMM IV.
It has come to the point that I do NOT buy a game until a NO-CD crack exists for it.
French? (Score:4, Insightful)
(1) You're posting an illegal crack that violates YOUR OWN RULES on piracy
(2) You stole someone else's crack. Couldn't bother making your own? Sheesh. Now THAT'S French for you!
This french surrender business and now this "whatever is retarded is french" is so obtuse!
It's like saying all americans are morons and deserve Bush.
Re:French? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:French? (Score:5, Funny)
All ze Americans are morons and deserve Bush.
Re:French? (Score:4, Insightful)
Very true. Now I hate the French as much as the next Briton, but I feel the American accusation of cowardice during the Second World War is resting on pretty thin ice.
"Surrendering? That's inexcusable! What you want to do is refuse to help for several years even though your supposed friends are getting killed in the millions. Then, if attacked, join the war and pretend that it couldn't have been won without you and that you're so selfless for coming to their aid. Ensure that you become a superpower in the process and enjoy sixty years of fucking over the rest of the world!"
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:French? (Score:5, Insightful)
What you want to do is refuse to help for several years even though your supposed friends are getting killed in the millions
Damned if they don't
Ensure that you become a superpower in the process and enjoy sixty years of fucking over the rest of the world!
Damned if they do
Re:French? (Score:5, Informative)
The Zimmermann Telegram (Score:4, Informative)
.
The German occupation of Belgium set the pattern for what was to come. The Rape of Belgium: The Untold Story of World War 1 [amazon.com]
The Zimmermann Telegram [wikipedia.org] was authentic:
January 16, 1917
On the first of February, we intend to begin unrestricted submarine warfare. In spite of this, it is our intention to endeavor to keep the United States of America neutral.
In the event of this not succeeding, we propose an alliance on the following basis with Mexico: That we shall make war together and make peace together. We shall give generous financial support, and an understanding on our part that Mexico is to reconquer the lost territory in New Mexico, Texas, and Arizona. The details of settlement are left to you.
You are instructed to inform the President [of Mexico] of the above in the greatest confidence as soon as it is certain that there will be an outbreak of war with the United States and suggest that the President, on his own initiative, invite Japan to immediate adherence with this plan; at the same time, offer to mediate between Japan and ourselves.
Please call to the attention of the President that the ruthless employment of our submarines now offers the prospect of compelling England to make peace in a few months.
There is much of interest here - not least the talk of an alliance with Japan.
The historical background:
April 22, 1915
The German Embassy publishes this warning [wikipedia.org] which will appear below a New York Times marine add posting Lusitania's schedule:
NOTICE!
> TRAVELLERS intending to embark on the Atlantic voyage are reminded that a state of war exists between Germany and her allies and Great Britain and her allies; that the zone of war includes the waters adjacent to the British Isles; that, in accordance with formal notice given by the Imperial German Government, vessels flying the flag of Great Britain, or any of her allies, are liable to destruction in those waters and that travellers sailing in the war zone on the ships of Great Britain or her allies do so at their own risk.
IMPERIAL GERMAN EMBASSY
May 7, 1915 Luistania torpedoed without warning. 1200 die.
August 1915 A Bavarian metal worker stamps out 500 or so back-dated commemorative medallions of the sinking -- which British propagandists will replicate in the hundreds of thousands for sale through British wartime charities.
August 27, 1915 The Kaiser restricts attacks on large passenger vessels.
September 18, 1915 Unrestricted submarine warfare ends
DRM for games (Score:5, Interesting)
mp3's have, despite the music companies best efforts, proven to be what buyers want - not "you can only listen to this track on 2 machines" DRM files. That has been enforced by media coverage and scrutiny - pointing out and badgering the music labels that people don't want DRM junk.
This unfortunately hasn't happened with PC games - I guess they are less "mainstream" as far as media coverage is concerned.
I used to buy a lot of games, and enjoy playing them - but the situation has deteriorated very badly in the last 4-5 years. Games not only have the usual "key & cd/dvd in the drive" requirements, but I have encountered a number, which I paid hard money for, that refuse to install if I have CloneCD installed - others that refuse to install if I have Daemon Tools installed - both programs that I legitimately use (and not for games, just to avoid having to take tens of cd's around with me).
I bought HL2 - but haven't been able to play it for a couple years as I am behind a tight firewall and so can't register it. Consequently I haven't bought Ep2 or 3.
The games companies have to wisen up - I used to by 3-6 games per year - I now haven't bought a single one in the last 2 years - I can't be bothered with games I paid hard cash for treating me like I am a criminal. I am not interested (nor should ever need to) apply the various circumvention cracks to get around the DRM just so I can play a game I have bought.
The farce from Ubi-Soft only reinforces the situation - the same crackers who they decry as "destroying the games industry" are the ones they rip-off when they can't be bothered to write a patch (for a bug caused by all their neurotic DRM crap). Ubi-soft better hope there were no trojans in the crack - or they could find themselves on the end of a hefty lawsuit.
Who pirates the pirates? (Score:5, Funny)
DMCA takedown (Score:4, Funny)
They should send UBIsoft's ISP a DMCA takedown ;)
Pretty sure (Score:3, Insightful)
that someone in the coding department is going to be fired. If you're going to steal/use someone elses code - COVER YOUR TRACKS FOOL!
Re:Nope, (Score:5, Insightful)
No, but if you then show off said artwork claiming it to be your own then it does make you a bit of a dick.
Re: (Score:2)
They aren't "stealing" anything, the executable was theirs to begin with. If you spruce up my house with some fancy artwork it doesn't make it your house.
The crackers infringe UbiSoft's copyright when they distribute the patch, but that does not give UbiSoft the right to distribute the cracker's derived work. They are also infringing copyright. Or, if you prefer analogies, if I take a book you've written and modify it I cannot distribute my new version without your permission, but you cannot distribute my new version without me permission either - we both hold copyrights over the derived work.
Re:Nope, (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's actually not that easy.
Writing a program that has the capabilities of altering another program can be legal under certain circumstances. Our copyright says specifically that you may reverse engineer software and change parts of it to "establish interoperability". It's also a right you cannot waive, i.e. an EULA telling you you must not is void. You may of course still not distribute the altered version, but distributing a program that automatically alters a piece of software is something different.
Now,
Re:Unethical? Yes. Illegal? Hmmm... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Unethical? Yes. Illegal? Hmmm... (Score:5, Informative)
Yes. They've unintentionally violated copyright.
When an author uploads a torrent, is that file considered to have entered the public domain?
No, not anymore than if an author gives a free copy of a book away, that book enters the public domain. Authors (assuming they haven't sold their rights away) are allowed to distribute their own work as much as they want, and in whatever form they want. When someone else does it, they're in violation of copyright (unless they are licensed or copyright has been explicitly waived).
Re:Unethical? Yes. Illegal? Hmmm... (Score:5, Interesting)
Hold it right there!
UBIsoft not only distributed someone else's work without their permission. They didn't just go and do what the usual release group does, taking someone else's work and publish it. At least crackers usually have the decency to keep the producer's name on the product. I can't remember any cracker group claiming they actually made some game.
Looking at it this way, what UBIsoft did was even worse. They didn't only violate copyright and distribute someone else's work without compensating the original author (granted, it would first of all be hard to find him and second, it is distributed for free anyway, so there is no immediate loss for the author), but they didn't even give him credit! This is the problem here, not that they distribute someone else's work. As stated above, this work would have been distributed freely and without any benefit for the creator anyway. They refused him the acknowledgement!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)