| |
Didi
Registered: Nov 2011
Posts: 479 |
What is a "crack"?
In the release On the Farm III +8FD there started a discussion about what is a "crack". In CSDb rules a crack is defined as an unauthorized modification. In other scenes this would be called a "hack" or a "mod".
I hardly remember any games since 1994 which really needed to remove a protection, so most "crackers" started to use different clauses to declare their work, e.g. "raped" or something like this. But there also should be made a difference between linking an intro or training a game and other improvements like highscore-savers, bugfixes, improved packing and loading routines, etc. Crack might not be the correct name for it but what else to call it?
|
|
| |
Fierman
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 85 |
i am getting bored by this taking of 'originals' that were dumped ages ago anyway. there's a few thousand more games labelled 'uncracked' on gb64. are you going to do all of them? |
| |
Didi
Registered: Nov 2011
Posts: 479 |
@Fierman:
Nice off topic comment. You may sit down... |
| |
TheRyk
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 2069 |
As I said in the release comment discussion, the whole debate is old and I'm getting bored to read the same pros and cons over and over again. I'd be the last one who's against a category "mod". But in the end, the CSDb mods are the ones who interpret their set of rules, and I do not see any new arguments which might change their minds, so I expect that they will keep considering also bugfixing, training, NTSC-fixing, modding and whatsoever as cracking. And I won't lose any sleep over it. Copy protection? Come on, this is 2012, how many people still releasing C64 software still waste their time on futile copy protection!? |
| |
Didi
Registered: Nov 2011
Posts: 479 |
This topic has been widely discussed long time before CSDb existed and never led to a final conclusion. But why not discuss it if there's the need for. But release comments seems to be the wrong place for that. |
| |
Sixx
Registered: May 2005
Posts: 229 |
Mean while in a crack house down under.. |
| |
Achim
Registered: Jan 2010
Posts: 28 |
I won't lose any sleep over it either. But the simple question is why another category is always rejected. Look at the dreadful rules for 'crack'. What's that good for? Everybody knows that there're almost no more games to crack. We all know that modfiying is exactly what contemporary 'cracker' groups really do. So why not call it that way? Makes no sense at all.
|
| |
Moloch
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 2893 |
CSDb needs another category just like it needs more credits categories ... it doesn't, there is plenty right now.
Non-wares sceners and newbies certainly shouldn't have a say in changing things in the first place. Harsh words, but the truth really. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11111 |
having another category just creates the need to define what belongs into the new category and what not. and it doesnt really solve anything.
tons of the "cracks" released in 1985 dont involve removing copyprotection or even linking an intro either, they are often basically hex-edits in new fangled emulamer lingo. does anyone give a damn?
|
| |
iAN CooG
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 3132 |
" there're almost no more games to crack "
actually there are, there is almost no one able to do them. |
| |
hedning
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 4595 |
There is indeed a lot to do still, and you also need to do a nice package out of it after you got your hands on some obscure original with docs and everything needed for a nice release. I'm just happy people still care about this thing, and enjoy what we spend time and money on (getting originals, dumping them, cracking when needed, bug-fixing, ntsc/pal-fixing, scanning and typing in (sometimes translating) docs, sometimes make additional music and gfx to the game). Respect to the active groups on our beloved c64. |
| |
Adam
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 321 |
this topic is as old as time, well.. maybe not 'as old' but you get the picture. ;))
didi: Release standards for cracks in CSDb
;)
|
| |
Celtic
Administrator
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 807 |
Look, the rules have been established, and we dont want to change it, because it would also change every crack in this database. At a certain point you gotta settle on what you agree with, and i think everyone can agree that the c64 has seens things like intro-linking, fixing, or whatever as cracks.
For me this discussion stems mainly from the fact you crack mostly recently released PD games. And some sceners dont really like that or something. Personally i dont care, but i can understand people feeling it is futile.
In the end we are all hobbyist reliving the fun we had in our teens:). And mainly i am glad you and Laxity are back into effect. Go activity!
That said: you guys have the skill to focus more on jewel cracks. I would personally prefer to see one amazingly cracked old game, or a new intro coded by you (coz laxity intro were always fun!) then a release like On The Farm.
My challenge: no one has ever been able to one-side, properly crack Pirates!, many say it cannot be done.
Why not spend some time on that :)
Either way, there wont be any additions to crack catergories.
Have fun!
|
| |
Achim
Registered: Jan 2010
Posts: 28 |
I just read the old posts and pissed myself laughing. Fair enough. I can understand why the csdb staff can't hear it anymore.
Here are two more suggestions, just to annoy you (hehe):
1) "32k game", found 12 entries. why not delete that category? Makes it easier for all of us.
2) There're credits for almost anything one can think of. But where is "sound effects"? (well, this is a serious suggestion)
But who am I? I'm a non-wares scener and a newbie. So I better keep my mouth shut. I'm a good boy. I always do what I'm told.
|
| |
Rough
Account closed
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1829 |
Achim, you forgot to demand credits subject 'Rasters'.
Seriously... what Celtic said. |
| |
TheRyk
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 2069 |
I'm still dreaming of a single-sided fastloaded Skate or Die which not freezes in multiplayer mode.
BTT: Back to work, coders, crackers, gfxians, musicians and whatsoever, more releases, less inch pinching ;) |
| |
Conrad
Registered: Nov 2006
Posts: 833 |
Look, just rant about your problems on the definition of "crack" in the next scrolltext you write in your intro. These days I just seem to be reading lame poetry! ;) ;) |
| |
jailbird
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1576 |
And while we're at stupid labels, someone please explain to me what the friggin holy shit is a "fullscreen graphician"?!? I keep asking this question literally for years here, and none of the admins care to respond or do a flying fuck about it. *sigh* |
| |
enthusi
Registered: May 2004
Posts: 675 |
People not just doing charsets/logos. |
| |
Skate
Registered: Jul 2003
Posts: 490 |
Since I'm not a cracker and i don't know much about cracking, i have a serious question on this subject.
How many commercial games back in the days had a real protection (in percantage)? It includes copy protection, trainer protection, hidden "is original?" checks, timers etc. etc. Of course i'm not asking for an accurate answer, just an average percentage.
I know there were some companies like Ocean who made crackers' life really harder but i'm not sure if all Ocean and other big brand company games had those protections. And what about the rest of the games released by smaller companies or people? |
| |
jailbird
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1576 |
Quote: People not just doing charsets/logos.
Yep, that would be fine with me if we'd also have a "charset/logo graphician" category. And who are those graphicians who are doing just charsets/logos anyway?
Edit: by the same logic, why aren't coders separated into vector coders, plasma coders, scroll coders, etc? |
| |
TheRyk
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 2069 |
brilliant idea, the prollcoders not to forget!
And how about 6581 and 8580 musicians, SFX musicians, music musicians, club mix musicians...
scnr
edit: FFFFUUUU! |
| |
Achim
Registered: Jan 2010
Posts: 28 |
@skate: That's an interesting question. Afaik cracking is hardly documented anyway. On codebase there're a few docs (haven't read them yet), of course. But some oldschool crackers should really add some custom articles.
|
| |
bugjam
Registered: Apr 2003
Posts: 2477 |
Agree with Jailbird. There *is* actually the category "Logo graphician", so we could even get rid of 2 categories at the same time. Swapper + Mega-Swapper? Organizer + Co-Organizer? Also not really needed. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11111 |
i like where this is going.... =) |
| |
Achim
Registered: Jan 2010
Posts: 28 |
here's another pointless release category: fake game, 15 releases (out of 100.000). |
| |
Didi
Registered: Nov 2011
Posts: 479 |
I agree that category fake-game is kinda useless. There might be good games or bad games, but can someone explain what a fake game should be? As long as it is playable, it is a game. Unfinished ones are previews.
|
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11111 |
i'd like to ask the same regarding "fake groups". what is that really? |
| |
TheRyk
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 2069 |
Hmh weren't fake groups either lamer labels or (mostly) some coward labels just to be very explicit in scene wars without really being blamed? Nevertheless, it was often not hard to guess who this fake group really was. Imho the info fake group/lamer label of 1337-group xyz in the Trivia would do, no category needed. Same is true 4 fake demos. Trivia "Made with DemoMaker blablablub" should do. Fake Game??? What's this supposed to be? Ace just wanna have fun? |
| |
iAN CooG
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 3132 |
fake game recently discussed, marked now as fake game, previously was marked as crack.
http://csdb.dk/forums/?roomid=12&topicid=90008&firstpostd=90015..
There are many others around, also fake tools. Hence the category is needed even if not so often, luckily. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11111 |
ian has one of there rare cases there were it actually makes sense :)
most of the times however, people mix up "fake" with "intentionally bad". |
| |
TheRyk
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 2069 |
Fake tools? :) This should be true 4 any of my homemade crap tools which might have helped me getting a few things done but which noone except me every can/will want to use, documented or not. That's why I rather not release them. |
| |
jailbird
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1576 |
However, we'd definitely need a fake tits category. There's no way those are real! |
| |
iAN CooG
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 3132 |
Quote: Fake tools? :) This should be true 4 any of my homemade crap tools which might have helped me getting a few things done but which noone except me every can/will want to use, documented or not. That's why I rather not release them.
again, fake!=crap |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11111 |
indeed. if that was the case, then a lot of the recent "cracks" were infact "fake" :o) |
| |
Rough
Account closed
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1829 |
The Ryk: So you say the one Skate or Die 1-sided done by Sorex for WOW crashes?
Skate: First a question back: What is a "real protection"? The definition of crack is to make a protected program copy.- and playable for everyone. Actually even the most simple stuff like auto-start (especially on tape) or not-listable listing kept complete lamers from copying and changing memory of a product. Ergo, this is also a protection. Pretty quick the kids learned to trick those things over and companies came up with weird disk formats, killer tracks, using 35-42 tracks, password protection, dongle, younameit but with the circulation of cartridges incl. monitors a lot of these stuff got easy to trick over (ergo obsolete), at least when games were one-filed and most of them were in the late 80s/early 91 (heydays of Action Replay+Final Cartridge), as the US market, who offered mainly multi-load games, slowly dried out. Back to my first definition "to make a protected program copy.- and playable for everyone.", freezing a one-filer does, dirty (hence the ugly rebuilt effect on freezes), starting anywhere in the game but easy. But is it a crack?
Damn, I lost my train of thoughts.
Essence: A lot of simple things are protections, and in the beginning of the 64 era not every boy had a proper copy tool at hand right from the start. There was one on the 1541 disks, but that failed pretty quick and didnt copy files of a higher block size and stuff iirc. (DOS5.1 was way more handy, or whatever it was called)
To make the boy's life easy some people cracked the games, those guys could read the protected directories of originals, which was a secret to the kids. Put all the files like BASIC, SPRITES, ML, CHAR into one file with an executable SYS line. Voila. Everybody copy! So if you consider this, to us simple to trick over, a protection then a wide range of commerical programs had 'real protections'.
Groepaz: Fake group is a term for lamer label, which wasn't used when those groups Bad Taste, Gulas, Spalters were active. Purpose one was to make fun of other groups with low standard humour and to release games which the crackers considered they'd be a shame to release under the appropriate Genesis*Project, Chromance, Action labels. Which still makes me wonder why crackers felt responsible for a game's quality.. oh well. Fake groups started doing fake demos to continue low standard humour aimed at scene enemies or even just to have a fine time (like the entertaining Radebrekkjers stuff). |
| |
TheRyk
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 2069 |
Quote:The Ryk: So you say the one Skate or Die 1-sided done by Sorex for WOW crashes?
Yup, what I say:
http://www.c64-wiki.com/index.php/Skate_or_Die!#Versions |
| |
Adam
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 321 |
Quoting Skate... How many commercial games back in the days had a real protection (in percantage)? It includes copy protection, trainer protection, hidden "is original?" checks, timers etc. etc. Of course i'm not asking for an accurate answer, just an average percentage.
I know there were some companies like Ocean who made crackers' life really harder but i'm not sure if all Ocean and other big brand company games had those protections. And what about the rest of the games released by smaller companies or people?
I'm not sure as to what percentage it would be but i'd assume the figure would be quite high. I'd be interested to know or see if anyone has any figures? anyway, I do recall some software houses didn't do themselves any favors by using the same/similar protection systems over and over again, making the job of cracking just that little bit easier ;) Similar story with the Amiga and its copy protection systems. (hi, rob northen)
|
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11111 |
Quote:Groepaz: Fake group is a term for lamer label, which wasn't used when those groups Bad Taste, Gulas, Spalters were active.
i know exactly what was considered "fake group" back in the days. and i am still saying that the definition is very vague. try explaining why brainbombs are not a fake group, but the walker group is. (funny enough, there are a bunch of similarities between the two) |
| |
Skate
Registered: Jul 2003
Posts: 490 |
Didi said in his first post:
Quote:I hardly remember any games since 1994 which really needed to remove a protection
It makes sense not to call a product "crack", if there is no protection, nothing to "crack". My point was, what about the <1994 releases which doesn't have a real protection? Should we try to find them one by one and change their category as well?
Sometimes when a mistakenly used word widely used, it loses the original meaning. That's why i asked for an approximate percentage. |
| |
Achim
Registered: Jan 2010
Posts: 28 |
Hey Skate, I'm afraid you missed something. The category 'crack' will never be changed, because it's part of the c64 tradition. That of course makes the c64 scene a die-hard scene, but that's the way it is. |
| |
Graham
Account closed
Registered: Dec 2002
Posts: 990 |
Quoting Skate
It makes sense not to call a product "crack", if there is no protection, nothing to "crack". My point was, what about the <1994 releases which doesn't have a real protection? Should we try to find them one by one and change their category as well?
What's a protection after all? According to the programmer of V-Max, it's a fastloader and not a protection scheme. But then again in the early days it was already a "copy protection" if files were hidden from the directory so you couldn't simply LOAD and SAVE them.
|
| |
Achim
Registered: Jan 2010
Posts: 28 |
This thread really makes me think. Celtic stated (On the Farm III +8FD) that there's no need for another category "that has no merit'. Now, after reading Rough's, Adam's and Graham's posts, it seems like it's nothing but a big misunderstanding to pay tribute to those who removed copyprotections back in the 80's.
At least it seems to be a misunderstanding to give them credit for their technical achievements. Maybe they should be credited mainly for networking?
|
| |
TheRyk
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 2069 |
@Graham: In one of the other 700 or so discussions on the same issue, some even claimed, tape files with auto-run were protected, which made them assume, pure freezin' and saving the RAM from $0800 to $FFFF was already removing a copy protection and, hence, cracking...
@Achim: We just ain't livin' in the 80s anymore - though most of us wish we were. Back then, cracking was in the first place removing protections. If there was always much "merit" for that, is a different story, since almost everyone with a suitable cartridge and some minimum knowledge could reset-crack a onefiler, but only few could really crack some multi-disk games. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11111 |
Quote:We just ain't livin' in the 80s anymore - though most of us wish we were. Back then, cracking was in the first place removing protections.
back in 1984, the bulk of "cracking" involved typing "load" and then "save" :) |
| |
TWW
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 541 |
Imagine a dog with it's snoute up another dog's ass. Then imagine some other dogs standing near by watching and one of them say:
"Poor lad... Hooked on crack..." |
| |
Skate
Registered: Jul 2003
Posts: 490 |
Quote: Hey Skate, I'm afraid you missed something. The category 'crack' will never be changed, because it's part of the c64 tradition. That of course makes the c64 scene a die-hard scene, but that's the way it is.
Also you are missing a point. I'm not the authority here. I'm the one who is "asking" to elite crackers about this protection subject which Didi brought forward.
As far as I understand, Didi suggests not to call crack some of the new so called cracked games because they are not really cracked since they don't have any protection. So, i asked about the old games. Are they all really protected? Noone is trying to change the crack category. But if we're going to call some of the new cracks something else, we should change some of the old cracks' product category as well. Here is my point. I'm not the one who is able to identify if a crack is really deserved to be called a crack etc. I'm just corious on this subject. |
| |
Rough
Account closed
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1829 |
@TheRyk: Actually I do not only claim auto-start on tape is a copy protection, it definately is. Kept people from entering SAVE"NAME",8,1 after loading. Additionally disabling [Run/Stop]+[Restore] helps even more.
Also when defining cracking as the removement of a copy protection then freezing IS cracking. In a lame and dirty manner without the need of skills, but definately the frozen (or freezed if you take it as proper verb) files were copy.- and playable.
Quote:i know exactly what was considered "fake group" back in the days.
@Groepaz: When you know, why do you ask? It figures! Brainbombs were unlike TWG never intended to make fun of others or release crapshit only. Why someone gets the idea that Brainbombs would be a fake-group is beyond any logic. Because the member status was secret? So Elite were fake too.
And I've got a secret to tell... Troep and Hitmen have a "bunch of similarities" too. Doh!
@Graham: To add to your discussion with TheRyk, "According to the programmer of V-Max, it's a fastloader and not a protection scheme." - of course a single utility does not necessarily represent one branch only. If a fastload tool keeps someone from copying the disk it's installed on as side effect, it's a protection too. Intended or not doesn't matter. |
| |
Graham
Account closed
Registered: Dec 2002
Posts: 990 |
Quoting Rough
@Graham: To add to your discussion with TheRyk, "According to the programmer of V-Max, it's a fastloader and not a protection scheme." - of course a single utility does not necessarily represent one branch only. If a fastload tool keeps someone from copying the disk it's installed on as side effect, it's a protection too. Intended or not doesn't matter.
Ofcourse, that's what I tried to say with that. It is a protection even though the programmer himself never considered it as one.
|
| |
Adam
Registered: Jul 2009
Posts: 321 |
Quoting Rough...Also when defining cracking as the removement of a copy protection then freezing IS cracking. In a lame and dirty manner without the need of skills, but definately the frozen (or freezed if you take it as proper verb) files were copy.- and playable.
i see what you're getting at, sure.. freezing gets around the protection and allows you to copy a program but freezing has nothing to do with 'cracking', freezing is just plain ol' freezing. =)
|
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11111 |
Quote:Brainbombs were unlike TWG never intended to make fun of others or release crapshit only.
please explain how Skramble +5HDF falls into this "crapshit only" category. also please explain how any of their releases (every single one a so called first release, btw - except the one above) is different from what other supposedly non fake groups release these days and why that doesnt make these groups fake too. please be specific.
Quote:Why someone gets the idea that Brainbombs would be a fake-group is beyond any logic.
lets say i have talked to a former member and he told me so. and the question isnt why, the question is by what definition not - so what *does* define a "fake group" then? please be specific.
Quote:So Elite were fake too.
so we already found out that secret member status is irrelevant. what *is* relevant then? please be specific. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11111 |
Quote:freezing has nothing to do with 'cracking', freezing is just plain ol' freezing.
that opinion however only formed later in the scene - in 1984 there wouldnt be a difference between freezing and cracking. and isepic was one very productive cracker :o) |
| |
Achim
Registered: Jan 2010
Posts: 28 |
This has always been a big difference. I remember being disappointed everytime I had to realise that I only got hold of a freezed version. I always started searching for a 'proper' crack instead. |
