| |
Richard
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 621 |
Cracker Charts
I'm starting to get really confused now. Some diskmags, such as Vandalism news, do cracker charts with no points to any fake groups (Lamer Labels) however, Arachnophobia puts fake groups as well as proper groups on to the cracker charts. I don't think lamer labels should be added to the cracker charts, the lamer labels should represent the cracker groups, and they should get points. I think it is very silly the way Arachnophobia does the charts, and that it is right what Onslaught said in Vandalism news, regarding the charts. |
|
| |
TDJ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1879 |
Quote: I'm starting to get really confused now. Some diskmags, such as Vandalism news, do cracker charts with no points to any fake groups (Lamer Labels) however, Arachnophobia puts fake groups as well as proper groups on to the cracker charts. I don't think lamer labels should be added to the cracker charts, the lamer labels should represent the cracker groups, and they should get points. I think it is very silly the way Arachnophobia does the charts, and that it is right what Onslaught said in Vandalism news, regarding the charts.
Thanks for sharing. |
| |
Jayce
Account closed
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 39 |
O_o
|
| |
Commander
Account closed
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 106 |
Quote: I'm starting to get really confused now. Some diskmags, such as Vandalism news, do cracker charts with no points to any fake groups (Lamer Labels) however, Arachnophobia puts fake groups as well as proper groups on to the cracker charts. I don't think lamer labels should be added to the cracker charts, the lamer labels should represent the cracker groups, and they should get points. I think it is very silly the way Arachnophobia does the charts, and that it is right what Onslaught said in Vandalism news, regarding the charts.
ArachnoPhobia has just another point of view. If every diskmagazine should do the same, then what's the point of having more than one diskmag in the scene... It's a matter of taste and it's also a matter of point of view.
|
| |
cadaver
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1160 |
A bit unrelated, but it just came to my mind: If all productions were quality, there wouldn't be a need for lamer labels :) |
| |
Stryyker
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 468 |
Well, blame those that vote! Some mags may or maynot filter (The Beergarden will filter some charts in the future). |
| |
Vengeance
Account closed
Registered: Mar 2002
Posts: 22 |
Lamer label votes are like a DONKEY vote a donkey vote in australia is like when you go to an election and vote shit or dont vote at all etc. All crackers involved in lamer labels have a real handle anyway even if they do a quality verion of a crack.
so its kinda a spilt personality and I am sure most cracker dont want there lamer label voted for unless in fake charts.
As for them being put in charts with real groups, thats inexperiance and mistaken fortunes on the editor or the magazine in quetsion. If the editor is dumb enough to mistake them for a real group then the magazine has to be in question. Investigative jornalism I think we call it. |
| |
Stryyker
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 468 |
Aren't the charts just a reflection of what people vote for? It can be hard for editors to decide who gets their votes included or not. Some fake labels are more active than some long gone scener. |
| |
Shake
Posts: 133 |
exactly, if people vote for it they have their reasons to get it in the charts. And please Vengeance "investigative journalism" what big words. It's Just a matter of deciding to add them or filter them from the charts. |
| |
Commander
Account closed
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 106 |
And for everybody who keeps complaining about the fake-labels, start first with complaining to these who made those fake-groups possible (the so-called quality-groups with a mask). If they never started with this, then they would never had this problem! I think that it is cool now that they are faced with something which they created themselves!!!! I think that ArachnoPhobia did a good thing, it was about time to face these groups with their own problem : or you release a game or you don't release it!!
And by the way, even if some games are from a low buget, they still deserve to be released by those who want and they also still deserve to be put in a release-chart when a diskmag decides to do.
|
| |
Celtic
Administrator
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 807 |
Better a fake roup introlinkin then a real roup... You guys must be so ashamed makin Mermaids 5 block game into a game into a 45 block game... phew atleast use a fake label for that, coz that aint good man, that is no quality!
Try to think about what you guys create yourself be4 making comment on others... And is it really neccessary to 'crack' a 5 block game like that (and according to mermaid you even made one of the sprites in astrstorm bug!)....
Well.. do not judge the fake labels, coz they are done for this reason... to not look like complete fools like you guys are looking now! |
| |
Jazzcat
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1044 |
Word! :0
Why tarnish your own group's lable with crap? quality is the key, if the game is not quality it does not deserve to be released under your "quality" lable.
|
| |
Rough
Account closed
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1829 |
if role like to "crack" 2 blocks games it's okay for me but either bonita is too stupid to clean the memory or he intentionally added trash into the memory to make the file longer. either way pretty lame. |
| |
xIII
Account closed
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 38 |
Quote: Word! :0
Why tarnish your own group's lable with crap? quality is the key, if the game is not quality it does not deserve to be released under your "quality" lable.
If it is crap it shouldn't be released at all !! Fake groups are lame !! If someone thinks he's too much elite to release it under its own group name, then don't release at all !
Thats my point of view !
Thank you.
xIII |
| |
Richard
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 621 |
Quote: ArachnoPhobia has just another point of view. If every diskmagazine should do the same, then what's the point of having more than one diskmag in the scene... It's a matter of taste and it's also a matter of point of view.
I understand now. Thank you Commander :) |
| |
Richard
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 621 |
(continued)
Please note, I wasn't trying to slag anyone off, regarding the cracker charts. |
| |
Commander
Account closed
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 106 |
Quote: if role like to "crack" 2 blocks games it's okay for me but either bonita is too stupid to clean the memory or he intentionally added trash into the memory to make the file longer. either way pretty lame.
Rough, the release was maybe bad... Bad releases have been done by more groups (even Onslaught did do some not 100% releases in the past, mistakes can be done... and Faayd isn't a quality-releaser, we admit that), but that's not the fact here. Fact is that you, Rough, simply believe what somebody else tells you!!! Celtic hasn't seen the release, otherwise he knew that this 45 blocks were including also an intro (like many groups include...)! Rough, have a look at the release yourself!! (you will see that it is a bad release by Faayd, but you will see also that these complaining people are overreacting because that these 45 blocks is the whole file including the intro, not the game only like they are talking about)
Celtic, why didn't you have a look at it...? You probably only saw the comment of Mermaid who did the comment not 100% because she probably didn't like her game to be released by another group. Celtic, wasn't YOU too fast in reacting? And second, I still have the right to say the truth about that fake-releasing. Because Role did release something which some people didn't like, doesn't make that fake groups are neccessary! Or you release it or you don't!
If so-called quality groups like QUALITY, then they also don't think about releasing the so-called crap under another name, I call that a quality group with a mask.
But I understand a lot of you, it's again that kind of elite-crap like always. I've seen this many years, as long as the cracking scene excists. But hell, you can think what you want. But remember, let me also think what I want, okay?
Especially to you, Celtic, who told me that I better didn't say a word about this. It's everybody's right to say his word, or isn't it? Some guys think fake groups are neccessary and some guys think fake groups are masks from quality groups... It's everybody's own opinion.
|
| |
Celtic
Administrator
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 807 |
Quote: Rough, the release was maybe bad... Bad releases have been done by more groups (even Onslaught did do some not 100% releases in the past, mistakes can be done... and Faayd isn't a quality-releaser, we admit that), but that's not the fact here. Fact is that you, Rough, simply believe what somebody else tells you!!! Celtic hasn't seen the release, otherwise he knew that this 45 blocks were including also an intro (like many groups include...)! Rough, have a look at the release yourself!! (you will see that it is a bad release by Faayd, but you will see also that these complaining people are overreacting because that these 45 blocks is the whole file including the intro, not the game only like they are talking about)
Celtic, why didn't you have a look at it...? You probably only saw the comment of Mermaid who did the comment not 100% because she probably didn't like her game to be released by another group. Celtic, wasn't YOU too fast in reacting? And second, I still have the right to say the truth about that fake-releasing. Because Role did release something which some people didn't like, doesn't make that fake groups are neccessary! Or you release it or you don't!
If so-called quality groups like QUALITY, then they also don't think about releasing the so-called crap under another name, I call that a quality group with a mask.
But I understand a lot of you, it's again that kind of elite-crap like always. I've seen this many years, as long as the cracking scene excists. But hell, you can think what you want. But remember, let me also think what I want, okay?
Especially to you, Celtic, who told me that I better didn't say a word about this. It's everybody's right to say his word, or isn't it? Some guys think fake groups are neccessary and some guys think fake groups are masks from quality groups... It's everybody's own opinion.
Alright, you really do not get the point i was getting to, but maybe my answer was a little short.... Fakelabels are MAINLY for FUN! That's all there is to it. These labels crack the games that their alter-ego in any other group (or how you call em quality-groups) would not crack because it would be LAME to do that..
Take for example 'Astrostorm'. And yes, i have in fact seen it, before i wrote my last comment, so do not gimme shit about that. Astrostorm is a game cracker-groups who like to do quality releases will never crack coz it is simply not good for there reputation. For example it has very little to train (which you did not do) and when the release comes (including the cracker group intro) it will be about 20-25 blocks loinger then the original size... (well you guys managed to make it 40 blocks longer, which is probably because an extensive long intro)...
Btw. after i have seen the release, only then have i seen mermaids comment and saw there was also a sprite bug. If ROLE makes releases nowadays only for diskfilling please stop, try making less releases but quality instead, and you guys have enough, more then enough (*grin*) members who can produce the quality the scene requires...
You are saying the truth about fake-labels, no you are saying YOUR truth on fakelabels. I myself once had fake releases, and many with me will agree, only the fun of doing something completely irrational and against 'scene-tradition' was the reason for doing it, combined with the fact that the public still deserved the lesser quality games.
I aint saying fake-groups are neccessary, i was saying that what you guys did should not have been done, coz it was utterly lameness.
And yes, i think what I want and you are entitled to your opinion, but do not come to me with the 'elite-crap' coz i was never part of it, and it is not the way I am, I was merely displaying my opinion on your comment regarding fakelabels in the cracker charts.
And last but not least, i NEVER asked you to shut up or anything, just bable away if you like, it is your opinion and go ahead, but dont gimme this shit you are displaying to me.
|
| |
White Flame
Registered: Sep 2002
Posts: 136 |
What I don't get is how you can "release" something that's been already released for worldwide free download. And "Original Supply: Faayd", shouldn't that be "Original Supply: Mermaid", since she's the one who uploaded/supplied/released/whatevercrackerterm'd it to the world-wide distribution of the 'net? |
| |
Moloch
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 2925 |
White Flame -
When I was active in the wares scene we didn't release "freeware" - no points were awarded for it so nobody touched it.
These days what is left of the wares scene, with the exception of Onslaught probably, will release anything they can get their hands on and call it a "first release" and a "crack".
Years gone by a group like Role could only get a first release if they coded it themselves...
|
| |
Cupid
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 83 |
You guys seriously care about the cracker charts anymore? Give me a break, it is over!
Oldie cracker charts might be a rather pathetic idea to keep the chart section filled.
But the "cracks" coming out nowadays of "new productions" are just a joke. People even "crack" 1k game compo entries...
There is no big market anymore, hence there is no piracy of originals hitting the market, hence there is no cracker scene...
just my two cents
|
| |
Warbaby
Account closed
Registered: Mar 2002
Posts: 60 |
Cupid:
As long as people release cracks there's a cracking scene.
Ofcourse it's true that things are different now. It's called EVOLUTION. Look it up, pal. |
| |
Rough
Account closed
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1829 |
@cmr: why do you draw conclusions on things which are wrong? I have added Astrostorm and your groups's crack to my encylopaedia page a few days after it has been released, and there is not only intro code in front of the 2K game, but as far as I remember also a good amount trash bytes which give a good amount of the 45blocks, actually the lame intro cannot take 43 blocks, so please look at your own releases first, before you tell others to do, although they have already done. |
| |
Vengeance
Account closed
Registered: Mar 2002
Posts: 22 |
Maybe we should call it the Releaser charts then.
Theres definately only real cracking coming out from the oldie groups. Except the odd protected release which is normally coder by a scener anyways and thrown in just for fun.
Fake labels, I always though fake labels were to provide the non quality games to the gamers/collectors out there. And to have fun with other groups. (Hi Alphaflight)
Anyways, It tarnishs your own group when you release it under your own label and then some other person goes and throws it out as Bigpiss/Urine. Especially if the Urine version was to be better etc. Urine is just an example, as I mean any fake group in general.
|
| |
Rough
Account closed
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1829 |
and for those which are a bit 'slow':
when adding the release to my homepage I have looked through the memory of the file! |
| |
Commander
Account closed
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 106 |
Quote: and for those which are a bit 'slow':
when adding the release to my homepage I have looked through the memory of the file!
Rough, you are right! This was a very bad release!!! I admid that (while many others don't dare to do this... or spread lies...). But look at this : some people got their chance now to put Role in a bad light now (especially Mermaid and Celtic, because this forum had another purpose than lighting up the Role release), does this mean that Role is such a bad group? Already some guys suddenly put a vote to the group Role. Well, it is all childisch!!! But like some people don't like to be called ELITE, they keep on doing their thing like in the past : annoying people!
Rough, you are right (for the second time), that's why I will probably try Role to stop releasing games. My apologies to Mermaid (who didn't dare to say what was really on her mind : she didn't like her game to be released by another group). And for those people who like to be childisch by suddenly giving Role a vote in this database, keep on doing your own ELITE-kind stuff (that's the thing which has destroyed the scene almost in the past, and I can know it, I have been there all the time).
Rough, thanks for being neutral and trying to be honest.
And for those guys who don't like Role or maybe me personaly, please be honest and tell it to me! Don't punisch the whole group because of... You know what I mean... It's strange that the old ELITE still get their hands on these databases and so... They don't earn to rule nowadays. The guys who really keep this c64 scene alive, earn to be honoured!
|
| |
Celtic
Administrator
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 807 |
To be straight. i have nothing against role or you personally, you have been a good contact back in the day. I was just pointing out my opinion... Jesus Christ man, get all offended by it. |
| |
Fungus
Registered: Sep 2002
Posts: 680 |
Yes yes, thats where the problem is always is... Elite vs Lame... whatever...If you get offended, then you should be. I dont have a problem with you, or Role, thats just my opinion on it.
Why release something that is freeware on the net and FILECOPYABLE... this is what makes something crackable or not, can you copy it with a filecopyer. If you cant, then its not cracked right, or should not be IMHO.
Now, that doesnt go for ingame protections and you can go ahead and FIX something. or shortening or whatever applies.
Everything the last years has ben RELEASES, not much cracking involved, and not a T/S loader is really some protection... At least some people make thier games hard to depack and run.
I think release charts would be more applicable to the current SCENE, and using the cracking charts for the oldies.
/Fungus |
| |
White Flame
Registered: Sep 2002
Posts: 136 |
Yeah, there's nothing new to crack. Any "Release Chart" should be for people creating new productions/games/etc, or digging up & repackaging lost wares of the past that can't currently be downloaded. Like I said above, if something's already released to the 'net, how can you "release" it afterwards? |
| |
Cupid
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 83 |
Hoth: Evolution also means ditching things that don't make sense anymore, hence we don't have tails (ok, agreed, with a tail you could type AND move the mouse at the same time but that's just an idea).
There is also a think called emancipation and liberation, throwing away old ideas and thinking of new ones. |
| |
Warbaby
Account closed
Registered: Mar 2002
Posts: 60 |
Cupid:
So if something doesn't make sence anymore we should just ditch it? I always thought that the scene was about fun!
Maybe you take things too seriously... |
| |
Rough
Account closed
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1829 |
Cmr: Nice see to you now have understood my point of view. Like I already pointed out above, there is no problem for me that Role is releasing a 2 blocks game.
To me the sense of fake labels was always fun and not to release lame games which would spoil my "real" cracking group's reputation. As if the cracker would be responsible for the quality of the game!!!!, I, as a cracker, am responsible for the crack quality, nothing else.
And, please, dont say some idiot now that it's not really cracking to release these games. Everybody knows it. |
| |
Rough
Account closed
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1829 |
hm, I dont know Cupid personally, but to me he looks as someone who doesnt take this too serious at all. |
| |
Fungus
Registered: Sep 2002
Posts: 680 |
How can anyone take any of it serious? It's funny as all hell. :)))
Also, for people who take "along time" whats with looking through memory? You think someone is recracking? or what?
As for calling new stuff "cracked" , how can you call a 2 blocks compo games trained and bloated 45 blocks a crack?
And these self coded games? These are legitimate cracks too?
Get real...
If some games is PD, has NO protection at all, no more than depacking and shortening/training, than this is NOT a crack!
Its a RELEASE. Ther eis no points for these games IMHO! Like points count in this day and age anyways... its about the quality again, speed dont count! and thats my opinion!
/Fungus
|
| |
Shake
Posts: 133 |
Giving no points to pd games or games without any real protection could be a decision, the result is that cracking charts can be stopped right away since there are not enough entries anymore to make it something word counting. Would miss some of the fun in my opinion. One could argue about the name yes, they are releases not cracks.
OR you change the rules to todays standard and give points to any release in general. Points can be given to docs, trainers, fixes etc. cracking is only part of it and these days less important.
And btw: there is a sence in introlinking for some of the games. Some games are suplied to groups for spreading. (no not mermaids game) |
| |
White Flame
Registered: Sep 2002
Posts: 136 |
Does "spreading" really have any meaning nowadays in light of the internet? |
| |
Warbaby
Account closed
Registered: Mar 2002
Posts: 60 |
White Flame:
As I see it, the best way to "spread" something these days is to upload it on your website and announce it on c64.sk.
Mailspreading still exists, but only to keep that little subscene alive. |
| |
Rough
Account closed
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1829 |
Quote: How can anyone take any of it serious? It's funny as all hell. :)))
Also, for people who take "along time" whats with looking through memory? You think someone is recracking? or what?
As for calling new stuff "cracked" , how can you call a 2 blocks compo games trained and bloated 45 blocks a crack?
And these self coded games? These are legitimate cracks too?
Get real...
If some games is PD, has NO protection at all, no more than depacking and shortening/training, than this is NOT a crack!
Its a RELEASE. Ther eis no points for these games IMHO! Like points count in this day and age anyways... its about the quality again, speed dont count! and thats my opinion!
/Fungus
Fungus, and a quote from my post two posts above yours, : "And, please, dont say some idiot now that it's not really cracking to release these games. Everybody knows it."
You are a complete idiot! |
| |
cadaver
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1160 |
Filecopyability seems to be the unavoidable byproduct of striving for compatibility (IDE64, CMD devices etc.) :) Of course, it's progress, but in some ways also a pity, considering the art of cracking..
And yes, there's another thing: if freeware programs were distributed on the net in heavily protected .G64-format, all people couldn't copy them back to real C64 disks. Hmm...perhaps creating some kind of heavily encrypted installer program that would write the protected custom data on a disk. Gets complicated. :) |
| |
T.M.R
Account closed
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 749 |
Why doesn't everyone just protect stuff? Okay, so a D64 is going to be copyable but there's no reason why a bit of protection couldn't be added? So next time a game gets released, it gets mashed and protected and the crackers actually have to do some work...! =-) |
| |
cadaver
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1160 |
Hmm...but what can we do without sacrificing usability? For example, let's take an one-part game taking 1/4 of the disk side. How it can be reliably protected from introlinking?
In an extreme case (lame, but in fact most efficient regarding bypass of protections), the "crack"-intro would be a separate program that would load the unmodified game. It would be hard to distinguish the intro's "load command" from the legitimate user's "load command". So, the protection would have to be disk-based instead, and the user would be forbidden from saving anything else on the disk. Therefore 3/4 of the disk side would be wasted.
IMO, it'd be a bit ridiculous to limit the legitimate user's actions in that case, just to provide challenge for today's crackers. In the case of multipart programs taking almost whole diskside, it's a different story.. then the diskside can be considered "dedicated" to that program. |
| |
Warbaby
Account closed
Registered: Mar 2002
Posts: 60 |
Cadaver:
You are good at making games, right?
Why don't you make a simple game with some good protection, and then challenge the crackers! I would love to see that!
|
| |
T.M.R
Account closed
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 749 |
Hoth: protection isn't really the same gig as writing games, the people who know protection best are crackers...
Cadaver: it's possible to do stuff like hide the data on the disk and still do stuff like writing the highscore to it and so on; the crackers have to make it more portable, that's their job. =-) |
| |
cadaver
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1160 |
Hoth: My knowledge of protections is minimal, I was just talking of what theoretically is possible/isn't. For me it's enough to get the C64 to do what I want, in the context of the program :)
And as cracking groups are getting more & more lazy, there's also a chance that no-one would take up such a challenge. In that case, all the protection effort would be wasted :)
TMR: I wouldn't rely on cracking groups making programs portable/compatible :) |
| |
T.M.R
Account closed
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 749 |
Well, if the crackers can't do it the oldie crackers certainly can... Maybe there should be points awarded for anyone who can put a half decent disksystem in...? =-) |
| |
Cupid
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 83 |
Quote: Hmm...but what can we do without sacrificing usability? For example, let's take an one-part game taking 1/4 of the disk side. How it can be reliably protected from introlinking?
In an extreme case (lame, but in fact most efficient regarding bypass of protections), the "crack"-intro would be a separate program that would load the unmodified game. It would be hard to distinguish the intro's "load command" from the legitimate user's "load command". So, the protection would have to be disk-based instead, and the user would be forbidden from saving anything else on the disk. Therefore 3/4 of the disk side would be wasted.
IMO, it'd be a bit ridiculous to limit the legitimate user's actions in that case, just to provide challenge for today's crackers. In the case of multipart programs taking almost whole diskside, it's a different story.. then the diskside can be considered "dedicated" to that program.
A onefiler could check it's own checksum or filesize and compare this with the real data stored somewhere on the disk (the extra unused tracks in the dir for example).
Rather stupid protection but I believe some of the introlinkers would have trouble with it.
As for me taking this serious, no, I don't!
I just consider it really hillarious how some people keep flogging this dead horse. Get over it, do some "quality cracking" or even more to the point "oldie cracking" charts and replace the crack charts with that one.
|
| |
taper
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 119 |
I wrote a long post here some days ago, but it seems like it didn't get saved. Just my luck. Anyway, I'd like to add some of my views about cracking of today.
As most of you know, TRIAD is one of the few groups left still releasing new/before unreleased games. Now and then we also put out "mailversions" of certain games we find worthy, even if someone else got the firstrelease. Sadly it seems like we are the only ones still doing that these days (not counting the groups doing oldie-cracks).
We don't put out a PD game if our version ain't much improved over the publically available game (examples;Metal Warrior 3 +IFFL+trainers, BOFH megatrained and so on). Just linking an intro, making the release bigger than the original without adding any goodies is not the TRIAD way. What other groups do is their business though, and it's up to the public to decide what they appriciate the most, also when voting in the cracker charts.
There are for sure talanted people only involved in the oldie-cracking scene these days that deserves to be voted for in the cracker charts, but there are still some talanted people cracking new games aswell. I would especially want to point out two of my groupmates:Quorthon (again for his versions of MW3, BOFH and a lot of other games) and iopop (cool versions of the old, but never before released, Helijump & Devils Gallery, both bi-lingual and others). They deserve votes aswell for showing that it's still important to do good versions also of new/unreleased games!
When it comes to the releasecharts, speed is what brings the points, not quality. This is the way of the list, and always was. TRIAD always put quality before speed, and we still do - by choice. We rather loose a firstrelease than to put out a bad version of the game. But whenever we can have both quality and speed, we love to be first aswell! Again, other groups have other philosophy's regarding this, but if you look at the present firstrelease list, I think you'll see that it's very possible to have both...
There seems to be a lot of people here who don't really care about the newer games anymore. I have respect for those who just want to play the old classics, but it's a little shame that they miss out on good newer games like the Metal Warrior series, Alea Jacta, The Run, It's Magic 2, Linko, Aniso, BOFH and so on. You should give new stuff another chance.
Anyone who wants to recieve all future TRIAD releases instantly via e-mail, both demos and "cracks" (Hey Fungus, I put the " " in just for you :) should apply to the TRIAD spreadlist by throwing a mail to me, taper@triad.nu
By the way, we appreciate the many nice reactions we get after spreading something new to the list, don't hesitate to mail me your opinions in the future aswell! |
| |
cadaver
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1160 |
Hi Taper!
Well MW4 is kind of far away yet, but would Quorthon prefer it with protection or not? I could do sort of an obscure protection regarding modification of the main executable file with very little effort to me :)
|
| |
Fungus
Registered: Sep 2002
Posts: 680 |
Rough: Bah, I cannot understand your bad english! :P and stop calling me an itiot, I am not, and you know it. BTW< do you want your f****** disks or what? Im sick of em in my disk box.
email me.
Taper: yes I want the cracks, how about spreading the ories aswell? this keeping ories to yourself biz is disheartening :)
Cadaver: Nice games indeed, also nice articles. If you want some ideas on easy disk protections, email me. DIsk Error protection with EOR routines are quite easy to do., add some timers with your irq load/depack, and youve got yourself a nice protection that will fool most :) Changeing it to t/s loader and not directory of coz. This doesnt upset anything in terms of playability. You can include a protection installer, and the game simply wont run until you install it :)))
much like a paramter.
/Fungus
|
| |
cadaver
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1160 |
Fungus: Thanks for suggestions, but I've a habit of including optional Kernal-based disk operations (non 1541/1571 users), this kind of rules out unusual disk access methods. My ideology is widest possible userbase "out of the box", and for that I'm prepared to sacrifice protection (never used it before anyway :)) |
| |
Cupid
Registered: Jan 2002
Posts: 83 |
Quote: Fungus: Thanks for suggestions, but I've a habit of including optional Kernal-based disk operations (non 1541/1571 users), this kind of rules out unusual disk access methods. My ideology is widest possible userbase "out of the box", and for that I'm prepared to sacrifice protection (never used it before anyway :))
Mate, that is scary, you got to use protection these days, mkay? |
| |
Rough
Account closed
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1829 |
@fungus: hehe, i want my disks of course. you are not an idiot. 8) |
| |
taper
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 119 |
Cadaver:Most crackers likes challenge, but if you want to add protection or not is entirely up to you. I never saw System3 ask the crackingscene if they wanted LN3 with or without protection. :)
Fungus:Hmm, aren't you allready added to the TRIAD spreadlist? Better doublecheck that! We haven't put anything out for a few weeks now, we are working on some stuff in the silent. |
| |
cadaver
Registered: Feb 2002
Posts: 1160 |
Taper:
Well, I've never really added protection before, so it's interesting to see what it will cause this time. I know (as mentioned earlier) there'll be lame ways around it for pure introlinking, as it won't be a real *copy*protection. But for any modification, trainers or such, one will have to face it :D |
