NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #16/NN_1992_16.iso/spool/comp/sys/ibm/pc/games/7306

Internet Message Format | 1992-07-22 | 5.7 KB

Xref: sparky comp.sys.ibm.pc.games:7306 rec.games.misc:16290
Path: sparky!uunet!darwin.sura.net!mips!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!balrog!mattb
From: [e-mail] (Matt Brown)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games,rec.games.misc
Subject: Re: Most Wanted Cracks List
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 22 Jul 92 18:32:16 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Matt Brown)
Followup-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games
Organization: Cabletron Systems INc.
Lines: 87
Nntp-Posting-Host: olympus

(Bill Dugan) writes:
>that "Robert W. Igo" <[e-mail]> writes:
>>Just so you all know I haven't been ignoring your requests, here's the
>>list of cracks I'm looking for.  I still have some new cracks kind people
>>have sent that I'm still sifting through, so I may have a few on the list
>>already.  If anyone has a crack for any of these collecting dust in your
>>hard drive, please send them along to me!
>
>Thank you very much for trying to pirate our games.  Would you like us to make
>any more for you?
>
>Bill Dugan
>Interplay Productions
>[e-mail]

I hope this is not redundant, but I haven't seen what I consider a decent
discussion of the distinction between what Bob Igo has posted, and what Bill
Dugan has read (two different points of view, for sure).  My own opinion is
in defense of the newsgroups, but it is not a flame at Mr. Dugan or any of the
game producers who share this bandwidth with us.

I think it's important to note a difference or 2 between the Internet newsgroups
and the "cracker" BBSes out there:

1)  Nobody is posting cracked games themselves to this group.  I see a
    big distinction between "game cracks" and "cracked games." One is a
    snippet of code or the use of a disk editor to remove an unwanted
    "feature"; the latter is taking the resulting sw and illegally duplicating
    or allowing the duplication of it.
2)  Nobody is advertising cracked games to be available anywhere.
3)  Nobody is promoting FTP sites with actual downloadable cracked games
    (in fact, most of the downloads available are demos or shareware, both
     of which are intended to increase legitimate purchases of software;
     though they may not have that effect. They are usually author-approved)
4)  Nodbody is advocating the download or reproduction of cracked games.
5)  Almost all instances of "crack" discussions are (at least allegedly) to
    eliminate pain-in-the-ass copy protection checking for legitimate users.
    Whether these "cracks" are used for additional and illegal activities is
    a issue of individual ethics, not newsgroup business.  Certainly, sw
    companies are justified in feeling that this newsgroup contributes to the
    potential for theft, indirectly (i.e., not a direct intent), and may
    resent it, they are in the position of a person whose bike was stolen,
    who resents the company that made the chaincutter used by the crook.
    Blame the crook, not the toolmaker, please.
6)  There is a great deal of discussion here about software ethics, from all
    points of view.  Listening in to this discussion, and to the appraisals
    of products by seriously involved consumers, should be of value to game
    companies, and what they gain should offset any losses they suffer
    because of this group (not from all piracy, just this group).  Hell, just
    looking at how packages are cracked, and which ones people don't bother
    to crack (because the copy-prot is well-designed) should save a company
    lots of grief, one way or another, on future products.
7)  Much of the ethics discussion supports, or at least respects, the game
    companies' efforts.  We wouldn't have heated discussions about the right
    way (if any) to share a game, or whether it is ok to re-sell a game, if
    this were not true.  There was even a discussion with the author of
    Bilestoad trying to convince him to port the game to some new machines,
    recognizing the problems he had with piracy, and trying to come up with
    solutions.  People's requests for non-software copy cheat info is
    regularly rebuffed ("RTFM"). These come from gamers, not company people.
8)  People are pretty candid in admitting when they have cheated, and it is
    usually not gloating.  If there is any gloating, it is based on technical
    ingenuity, not pirating a game and giving it to 20 other people.
9)  Most people here feel that it is legitimate to crack a game that you own.
    They don't seem to think that doing this is an excuse for broadcasting
    the game to the masses.
10) No copy protection is failsafe, short of DES encrypting the files, or
    using a hardware key.  Lots of it is very irritating, and deserves to be
    removed (IMO).  Others are well-engineered, and I would never think of
    bothering to remove them (EOB and Civ come to mind).

Last thing. Interplay in particular has put out some very good products, and I
for one would hate to see them stop.  I would welcome increased participation
here by Interplay and other companies; I would like to hear more of their side
of the story (rather than threats and whining, without any specifics.)  A
discussion of how much Interplay estimates it has lost due to piracy, perhaps
broken down into several categories, would be interesting, and I bet it would
have an impact. I'm sure that at least it is amusing for them to read
some of the misguided hints about their games that appear here with some
regularity, so we're not all bad, are we?

Matt
To proceed, type in the Message-ID from the article:
Subject: Re: Crack Needed for GS2000
From: [e-mail]
xxxxxxxx
WRONG!  Your Newsfeed will now be terminated.