17 réponses à ce sujet

[Pious_Augustus]

Think Copyright Protection DRM is bad today, let us take a trip back in memory lane

Anyone growing up in the 80s and early 90s whether they heard of the Don’t Copy That Floopy campaign remembers the worst forum of copyright protection ever. Most people now a days don’t care about the Instructions, they really don’t offer much anymore since most games have in game tutorials but back then you had to read that instruction book before you even bother to play because you’re going to have to take a test in regarding what you read and if you don’t pass you don’t play the game you bought.

Sometimes, you would have to match up things or special codes you seen or know how to read a map in order to play a game. For an impatient kid or adult, your screwed. It was beyond annoying. Even Street Fighter II has this copyright protection system for it’s PC game. Think about it, you think the typical kid who is going to play a fighting game wants to read through a Manuel each and every time he plays and then has to prepare for a test?

To make matters worse sometimes in the middle of the game during a check point you’ll have to stop playing read and then take a test before you kept playing. Yeah it didn’t destroy peoples PC or took over access to certain files but it has to be the worst form off DRM ever.

I was looking at the old King’s Quest site and it seems Sierra has finally decided to post the links to the documents on their site so people who had the game but lost the Manuel over the years could enjoy the game.

For years and years up until the Sierra officially crumbled people feared using the codes or pictures of what some things would look like because you literally even during parts of the game you would need to know what was what to advance. So older walkthroughs back in the 90s for King’s Quest VI would often refuse or the walkthrough would be incomplete because they make mention of their fear for Sierra coming after them which they often did.

Back when AOL was God and they had the best MMO out there Neverwinter Nights AOL would ban people for almost any and everything. The GSCCC for example would call AOL and their 15 year old moderators were famous for having their rules enforced by AOL Guides and suspending the accounts if you didn’t listen to the typical 15 year old forum tyrant. Before CjayC’s Gamefaqs there was Dr Gamewiz’s Gamewiz for all those old people.

I thought I would post the link to Sierra’s site where they released the copyright protection codes for all to enjoy!
http://www.sierragam...px/msgid/634055

Modifié par Pious_Augustus, 28 janvier 2010 - 08:05 .

[bzombo]

copy protection was a pain back then. "what is the first word of paragraph 3 on page 77 of the manual?" ugh! or those damn code wheels you had to use. i had a code wheel for a baseball game i used to play. man that thing was a pain. and sometimes the code wheel was wrong too! ack! i much prefer entering a key and inserting a dvd. drm stinks too, but has nothing on the old school stuff.

[Quixal]

Though some of the Sierra DRM was way over the top (heh, I had forgotten just how silly extremes they went to in attempts to protect their intellectual property), I will take a code wheel over current and trends in DRM any day.

[insochris]

bzombo wrote...

copy protection was a pain back then. "what is the first word of paragraph 3 on page 77 of the manual?" ugh! or those damn code wheels you had to use. i had a code wheel for a baseball game i used to play. man that thing was a pain.

oh man, i remember that, too! don't remember which games specifically for the manual one, but i remember Pipe Dream for the Apple II had a code wheel.

[Sir Shendar]

Well written, but this

Pious_Augustus wrote...

 Yeah it didn’t destroy peoples PC or took over access to certain files but it has to be the worst form off DRM ever.

is a matter of personal preference. I'd take game manual tests over system-destroying ring 0 malware (thank you Sony and EA).

[Pious_Augustus]

I think at one point in time years ago we all used Kazaa even knowing it was utter crap, but I don’t know. Honestly, I feel the old method of copyright protection was more intrusive. The CD Check function did so much for PC Gaming helping it’s growth not making it cumbersome to buy a PC game and then be forced to take a quiz every couple of minutes or test before you play forcing you to reread the Manuel.

It used to be during this time privacy or warez sites you know what you got if you downloaded a pirated copy. Don’t expect a fully functional game and expect a virus.

I think the consumer outcry for the current forms of DRM Copyright Protection has lead normal people to reverse engineer a lot of these games a create a better copy, a better game then the original and stripping it off DRM that can harm your computer which can be found on the original Mass Effect and Spore.

I think EA has taken positive steps to go back to the CD Check format but I think if we treat common consumers as criminals you create an atmosphere where you lose people to your cause.

Some people equated the current form of DRM as, “draconian” but honestly I feel the old 80s early 90s form was way more draconian and counter productive. But then again tell that to a parent of a kid who installs Mass Effect or Spore and the DRM disables access to your system or ruins it then you have to take it to Geek Squad where they plug in their memory stick to search for all personal information or porn to add to their memory stick.

I love looking back at old games it brings back a lot of memories.

It’s nice to see companies which have done very well like Bethesda release their past games for free as a thank you to the public. The First Elder Scrolls and also Elder Scrolls : Daggerfall which is bigger then Morrowind (Way Bigger, just no 3rd person view) they released for free. http://pc.ign.com/ar.../1002431p1.html

Modifié par Pious_Augustus, 29 janvier 2010 - 12:51 .

[rayvioletta]

while some of the old copy protection could be annoying, I'd still prefer it over potential destruction of a drive



some of it was also made to fit into the game much better. Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade for example required information from a book which came with the game to solve certain puzzles, meaning pirates would play a while and then become stumped. Lucas did similar things with many of their adventure games in fact, which was an incredibly smart move

firstly the pirates would test their newly 'cracked' copy, see that the game loaded up and played for the first minute or two and then brand it as job done, oblivious to the fact that they were distributing little more than a playable demo

which brings us to the second point; those who played the pirate versions would get hooked on the game and then hit the brick wall of copy protection. I'd be willing to bet that a lot of would-be pirates ended up buying the games as a result of this

[Fumbleumble]

At least 'copy protection' then, didn't stop legitimate players, corrupt os installs, prevent play if net connection went down, tell you you couldn't play it anymore because it wasn't allowing you to install it or just simply break DVD drives... I'd go back to finding words and code wheels any day of the week and be glad of it.

[Godak]

I didn't game on PCs during the 80s.



Of course, I wasn't born during the 80s...



But, GOD that sounds like a pain in the @ss.

[Seanzie88]

Godak wrote...

I didn't game on PCs during the 80s.

Of course, I wasn't born during the 80s...

But, GOD that sounds like a pain in the @ss.

Ditto.

[Humanoid_Taifun]

I've played such games and it's not as bad as it sounds. Granted, I'm a person that plays more complicated games and is used to relying on source books for full realization of them ("I just found 4 units of Fire Moss, and it looks like it can be used with my alchemy skill, but what can I actually DO with it?") so I have at least one manual on my desk (or at least a website open in the background) at all times - other gamers may play differently - but for me it was no trouble to look up one keyword every now and then.

[Humanoid_Taifun]

:roll: Stupid doublepost. :roll:

Modifié par Humanoid_Taifun, 29 janvier 2010 - 05:31 .

[rayvioletta]

Godak wrote...

I didn't game on PCs during the 80s.

Of course, I wasn't born during the 80s...

But, GOD that sounds like a pain in the @ss.

I feel old :S

to be fair, I didn't game on the pc back then either. had to make do with a Commodore 64 and a ZX Spectrum. marvel at the stunning graphics and 8 different colours!

[Jae Onasi]

Meh, I just had to replay all of Ortan, Trenches, and Anvil because of the lovely authentication scheme set up by EA/Bioware. The server decided not to notice me playing when I started playing the first time (probably due to the fact that ME2 was released the same day), and it cheerfully lost all my DLC stuff. Forcing me to delete 5 hours of corrupted save games to get back to a good one due to a server screwup is not my idea of rewarding someone who's honest and buys the game. If you're going to screw with the authentication, at least give my game my DLC back once I log back in. Ugh.

[Sblade]

Sir Shendar wrote...

Well written, but this

Pious_Augustus wrote...

 Yeah it didn’t destroy peoples PC or took over access to certain files but it has to be the worst form off DRM ever.

is a matter of personal preference. I'd take game manual tests over system-destroying ring 0 malware (thank you Sony and EA).

There´s no proof of Securom entering the definition of malware.

And Securom, until today, I have seen no conclusive data that Securom runs in RING0, it runs in RING3 until proven otherwise. Believe me, I have fought in the lawsuit which all I could.

I was one of the main campaigners that said it ran in RING0, it may have run in the past (2004), but it seems this is no longer the case.

The disk check is safe and sound, always runs in RING3.

The Minicom device for online authentications.... this is a thing I still have to investigate. I can´t say for certain that it runs in RING3 or RING0

So I have to manly step up and, until proven otherwise, apologize and admit I was wrong. But....

I have not discarded that Securom CAN BE EXPLOITED to run in RING 0 and do nasty things.... but again.... no proofs just investigation that I´ve retaken after some months of stop....

Note that even finally I can demonstrate an exploit so it can reach kernel access (or highest privileges possible as I like to say now) THIS IS NOT THE SAME as saying it runs at the kernel level.

Hope I stop rumours and mongering with this

[Mordaedil]

Sblade wrote...

Sir Shendar wrote...

Well written, but this

Pious_Augustus wrote...

 Yeah it didn’t destroy peoples PC or took over access to certain files but it has to be the worst form off DRM ever.

is a matter of personal preference. I'd take game manual tests over system-destroying ring 0 malware (thank you Sony and EA).

There´s no proof of Securom entering the definition of malware.

And Securom, until today, I have seen no conclusive data that Securom runs in RING0, it runs in RING3 until proven otherwise. Believe me, I have fought in the lawsuit which all I could.

I was one of the main campaigners that said it ran in RING0, it may have run in the past (2004), but it seems this is no longer the case.

The disk check is safe and sound, always runs in RING3.

The Minicom device for online authentications.... this is a thing I still have to investigate. I can´t say for certain that it runs in RING3 or RING0

So I have to manly step up and, until proven otherwise, apologize and admit I was wrong. But....

I have not discarded that Securom CAN BE EXPLOITED to run in RING 0 and do nasty things.... but again.... no proofs just investigation that I´ve retaken after some months of stop....

Note that even finally I can demonstrate an exploit so it can reach kernel access (or highest privileges possible as I like to say now) THIS IS NOT THE SAME as saying it runs at the kernel level.

Hope I stop rumours and mongering with this

This is true. SecuROM was actually pretty mild as far as copy protections go. The only downside is that it was an internet dependant copy-protection in an age where Internet still isn't factually everywhere.

StarForce, now THAT was a killer. And it also went into RING 0.

EDIT: Or is that StarForge? I can't keep it straight.

Modifié par Mordaedil, 31 janvier 2010 - 12:23 .

[Sir Shendar]

Sblade wrote...

Sir Shendar wrote...

Well written, but this

Pious_Augustus wrote...

 Yeah it didn’t destroy peoples PC or took over access to certain files but it has to be the worst form off DRM ever.

is a matter of personal preference. I'd take game manual tests over system-destroying ring 0 malware (thank you Sony and EA).

There´s no proof of Securom entering the definition of malware.

And Securom, until today, I have seen no conclusive data that Securom runs in RING0, it runs in RING3 until proven otherwise. Believe me, I have fought in the lawsuit which all I could.

I was one of the main campaigners that said it ran in RING0, it may have run in the past (2004), but it seems this is no longer the case.

The disk check is safe and sound, always runs in RING3.

The Minicom device for online authentications.... this is a thing I still have to investigate. I can´t say for certain that it runs in RING3 or RING0

So I have to manly step up and, until proven otherwise, apologize and admit I was wrong. But....

I have not discarded that Securom CAN BE EXPLOITED to run in RING 0 and do nasty things.... but again.... no proofs just investigation that I´ve retaken after some months of stop....

Note that even finally I can demonstrate an exploit so it can reach kernel access (or highest privileges possible as I like to say now) THIS IS NOT THE SAME as saying it runs at the kernel level.

Hope I stop rumours and mongering with this

There's no proof, alright. However, if it looks like malware, acts like malware - it is malware. You can call it whatever you want but when one product I bought completely disables another (also bought) product... yeah. Old versions of SecuROM used to kill my system outright - that's a fact, not rumor.
Sony DRM did run in ring0 but not SecuROM. Last post was written in a hurry but next time I'll make sure there's no misunderstanding.
Simple disc check is a big step forward and another reason to support game developers and publishers that don't treat their customers like criminals.

P. S. My apologies for grammar mistakes and offensive manner of this post. English is not my native language and this is a touchy subject.

[Sblade]

which product disabled? As far as I know it only prevents the application which is supposed to protect from running. It doesn´t disable 3rd party apps.



Why do you think it used to kill your system? Can you remember the version?



Which Sony DRM did run in RING0? Which are you talking about?