| |
hedning
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 4707 |
Release id #246242 : Campaign Manager 2024
Answering Fungus: "Submitted by Fungus [PM] on 30 September 2024:
Your definition of "crack" is wrong, cracking implied protection. If there is nothing to crack, it's not a crack. It's just linked, which is already a credit, but lacks a release type. No one back in the day called such releases cracks, they would get laughed off the scene."
It's not my definition. I just informed XmikeX what CSDb states. I wouldn't call it a crack either. |
|
| |
TheRyk
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 2170 |
<Post edited by TheRyk on 30/9-2024 21:26>
My personal opinion would also be: I've got doubts.
BUT: Isn't any unprotected-find-including-source-code-so-no-cracking-at-all-on-github/lemon/for um64 with intro-slapping a "crack" these days?
At least someone used a lamer label... there's tons of such releases meant seriously to be cracks... even by top 10 groups... *shivers* does "+D" make it better... as I said... doubts...
Quote: I wouldn't call it a crack either.
So... how do we call it? Rosebud? Then we need that new category...
*running* |
| |
Didi
Registered: Nov 2011
Posts: 485 |
There are plenty of "Cracks" on CSDb where the releaser claims to have cracked it even there was no protection at all. Every pirate-copy was called a crack. Maybe they were laughed at in inner scene circles but others were just happy to get the stuff for free and did not care. ;-) |
| |
Count Zero
Registered: Jan 2003
Posts: 1888 |
Whenever we had a scener honesty system there would be many more linking credits overriding the cracking creds.
Its just another ambigious scenish thing we shouldnt care about. |
| |
TheRyk
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 2170 |
well, WE CARE A LOT, but no matter the category, there's tons of shitty stuff labeled "crack", all we can do is S(H)IT AND WAIT downvote (WHO CARES LOL) or try not to forget the difference between REAL cracking andn mere cheap intro-slapping... (same goes with REAL gfx or wired or real music vs samples and whatnot)...
Personally, I don't need 1,000 categories or voting shit to know sparrows from nightingales...
All that recent categories complaints is totally overanxious waste of time which had better been invested into releases, so dear Fungus, calm down, ignore shit stuff by lamer labels, where's my next Space Taxi :D
 |
| |
Fungus
Registered: Sep 2002
Posts: 674 |
It's actually not that, and I do care. I have a few releases I'd rather not be labeled cracks, as they aren't. Cracker's honor/ego shit I guess. I would happily tag them under the proper release type if it was there.
I agree with you about micro categories! These are useless imo. A demo is a demo is a demo, 128b or 1MB.
I also agree a tagging system would be better suited to a lot of stuff that already has categories.
Ignoring stuff doesn't make it go away, run towards problems instead. As I said in the other thread, is this supposed to an accurate db curated by the scene, or is it just a datadump?
Agreed also with votes, delete, change to up/down and make it a popularity contest, surely that solves the problem (not). Just delete it entirely imo and who cares if someone made 10000 votes.
Clearly there needs to be some changes, to what end, who knows. It doesn't help when people get control freakish about it *cough* either and make it so someones opinion who never did a damn thing other than run their mouth is more important than some one who has been actively releasing and trying to make the scene better for 30+ years now.
/end rant |
| |
TheRyk
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 2170 |
Quote:releases I'd rather not be labeled cracks, as they aren't
Ain't that what lamer labels are all about... so, the release in question is nothing worth mentioning imho
I find it quite more embarrassing if so-called top-5 statwanking groups fail to do at least SOMEthing worth to be ASSOCIATED with cracking like trainers... but only introslap preview shit...
Anyway, not worth losing/cracking your head about it...
PS: Copy Protection seriously ain't a thing for the last 25 years mostly :_D |
| |
Fungus
Registered: Sep 2002
Posts: 674 |
Oh I don't care about the release, release everything, I don't care if it's lame or not. That's missing the point, I just want proper way to identify stuff.
Also tape releases are still technically protected against copying to disk. |
| |
Raistlin
Registered: Mar 2007
Posts: 641 |
The release type being “C64 Crack” could be “Pirated Software”, perhaps, since the credits already allow the distinction from “cracked” and “linked”..? But that’s not going to happen as most CSDb dev has stopped.
As for whether people would release magazine games back in the day without being laughed off the scene… teenagers desperate to have stuff to spread as a way to “join” the scene at the time might ;p … they might do that before they learnt to code, draw or compose as an alternative way to enter?
William Tell |
| |
Sentinel
Registered: Nov 2016
Posts: 20 |
Today it is certainly the case that no crack credit is given unless some protection has been removed or taken out of a cartridge. Until the mid-90s almost every group I know of gave the link as a crack. Cracked and Trained by... was the common term although in the early 90s there were hardly any protections left. And certainly not with the hundreds of Game on/Magic Disk releases that almost every group released. Perhaps this is the origin of the crack tag. For me too, in the 80s everything was crack as long as there was an intro in front of it. It was the common term for not being an original. I think it is simply defined more precisely today. Since my cracks from 1991-94 also have "Cracked" in the scroller, I have not started replacing the Csdb credits with linked even though that is actually the fact. |
| |
Fungus
Registered: Sep 2002
Posts: 674 |
Hundreds of Game On/Golden Disk games? wah? I have every disk of both there is maybe 100 games. Most of them are protected in some way too. Not sure who your original supplier was, but they must have been getting fake deprotected originals that used to make the rounds. They used Beta-Skip (from Crisp I think?), some loaders from Ivo-Herzog and Timex.
The 64er stuff had no protections except some games had anti-trainer protections or unpacking protections. The John Wells games come to mind for me there.
"Lamers" uploaded whatever to local boards, freezes, magazine stuff, self coded basic stuff of course, everyone started somewhere. Not really organized group/release stuff. So yeah just Pirated software or Freeware. |
| |
Didi
Registered: Nov 2011
Posts: 485 |
The early Magic Disks had protection, even on the mag itself. Most of the later ones were unprotected. Also other companies did not waste money on copy protections in the 90s anymore. |
| |
hedning
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 4707 |
Not all demos are demos either, and many music releases are demos. Etc etc. *hides* |
| |
Sentinel
Registered: Nov 2016
Posts: 20 |
@Fungus: If you only count 100 games, your collection of Game On and Magic Disk is more than incomplete. If I count from issue 1, I reached Game On's 100th game with issue 6/91 and Magic Disk's 8/91. In total, there are about 240 games on Game On and almost 210 on Magic Disk. That definitely puts me at 400. Hundreds, in fact. I was sure without counting that there were at least 250 from 1991 onwards, as I "linked and trained" around 230-240 for Excess between 1991 and 1995, and perhaps missed two handfuls. I also know that some games were still protected until summer 1991. I haven`t touched that originals back then. I took the rest of the originals straight from the magazines at the time, unless I had already gotten them from the coders later, in 1993 and 1995. That's just my statement about the quantity. After 1991 there was at least no more copy protection. Golden disks perhaps not included. And even small trainer protections aside, these were not a big obstacle if they existed.
Nevertheless, the common term at the time was "cracked and trained", even for games that had no protection at all and even for groups like Legend, Talent, Avantgarde, Triad, Red Sector, Success, to name just a few, who, unlike many small groups that came and went between 1992 and 1994, had real crackers, used this term. The difference is that only a fraction of these groups were able to distribute the releases via boards and the majority via the mail scene.
We in Excess also only found access to boards and first releases in 1993 and that with the support of Legacy, later Avantgarde. Up until then, feedback was almost only available via the swappers and people did what they saw others do. |
| |
Fungus
Registered: Sep 2002
Posts: 674 |
Yeah I must be missing a lot then or they are incomplete. Is there a catalog somewhere of them? I'm not surprised if I've been fed a line. Since I wasn't in the scene until the mid nineties and was cracking stuff independently until then, I am only aware of what was available in USA, and any commercial releases had protection that weren't distributed on some kind of magazine disk (loadstar included). The stuff CMD sold was unprotected afaik, and I always found all that stuff a bit boring. |
| |
Shine
Registered: Jul 2012
Posts: 341 |
@ Fungus:
Complete list of Game On:
https://www.c64-wiki.com/wiki/Game_On
Complete list of Magic Disk 64:
https://www.c64-wiki.com/wiki/Magic_Disk_64
Downloads of all GO & MD & GD as D64 (some G64):
https://www.magicdisk64.com/ |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11300 |
I'd rather ignore this collection and use the archive Graham made years ago - MD and GO are notoriously broken, and Graham put a lot of effort into comparing many images and make sure they actually work. |
| |
Fungus
Registered: Sep 2002
Posts: 674 |
I believe I have Grahams, but thanks for the listings, I need to organize all that. |
