[-] Yglorba@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 5 months ago

Near (the creator of BSNES / Higan, as well as a fan-translator who worked on Mother 3 and Bahamut Lagoon) was driven to suicide. It's a serious issue. And I suspect the sort of people who work on labors of love are often the most susceptible because they're the sort of people who want to listen and who care if people say something is wrong with their work.

157
Gog-games is back. (lemmy.dbzer0.com)

Gog-games has returned; if you missed it, they went private for a while, then announced they were coming back in a week. They seem to have come back early.

[-] Yglorba@lemmy.dbzer0.com 28 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

They do occasionally ask for money, but their messaging was always a bit weird.

While I agree their communications could be vague in some respects, I feel like the actual issue was that they were too specific in one way. They've been clear for a long time that further donations go to buying games from GOG so they can put them on the site (they were clear that they have enough recurring donations to cover the site itself.) The fact that they do this is why they update so much faster than everyone else, since other sites have to wait for games to appear elsewhere and few people bother to distribute updates outside of major ones.

But I think that this meant that there was a lack of urgency that deterred people from donating. If they just said "give us money if you want us to keep doing this" I suspect people would have donated more.

I wonder what happened, though? Something made them change course over just a few days - as recently as March 11th, they were posting updates on their Mastodon account.

Even weirder, the site now has a link to a changlog, listing games they've uploaded but which are not available to anyone except people who were invited.

[-] Yglorba@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

My understanding is that Ryujinx has been a lot more cautious in general. When TotK was leaked, simply mentioning it in their discord instantly got you the pirate role (which means they won't give you any sort of support), and continuing to mention it got you a ban. Similarly they crack down hard on even the slightest mention of title keys or the like. They're very upfront that this is done solely for legal reasons, but they're also extremely thorough about cracking down on any discussions that could expose them to legal vulnerabilities.

They're more cautious in a few other ways, too. They have a patreon but you don't get any newer versions or improved features through it, just cosmetic Discord roles, whereas Yuzu offers the latest releases to Discord subscribers first.

Both of these things (Yuzu devs and moderators openly discussing how to get title keys in its discord, and the fact that they profited off the TotK leak by locking versions updated to support it better behind donations) were specifically mentioned in Nintendo's lawsuit, so it's likely that Ryujinx being more cautious around potential legal vulnerabilities is what kept them off of Nintendo's radar, at least for now.

(Of course, if Nintendo does well enough against Yuzu here they might move on to Ryujinx next - but it makes sense that they'd go after the easier target first.)

762

One thing that leaps out at me about this ruling is that courts understand the internet a lot better nowadays. A decade or so ago Sony would have probably gotten away with the argument that Cox profited from the users' piracy; nowadays judges themselves use the internet and are going to go "lolno, they probably would have been Cox customers anyway. It's not like anyone pays for internet connection solely to pirate. And in most areas people don't even have a choice of provider, so how is Cox profiting from this?"

[-] Yglorba@lemmy.dbzer0.com 35 points 7 months ago

It's not a serious suggestion, they're just using this as a "fuck off" response to the record labels.

[-] Yglorba@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 8 months ago

While I'm all for piracy (obviously), there's always a choice. Decades ago when cable was going through this, TV was at the center of culture and absolutely everyone watched it.

That's just not true anymore. Even aside from piracy, they have to compete for people's time and attention with videogames, social media, and all sorts of other internet-based entertainment. I suspect a lot of the executives making these decisions don't realize this - they think it's still 20 years ago when having some of your biggest shows on your channel guaranteed a big audience. If they squeeze too hard people will just spend their time with other sorts of entertainment.

I think that the publishing industry is a good comparison - look at where it is now. It still produces stuff but its cultural relevance is a pale shadow of what it once was and its margins are razor-thin because few people are going to pay a premium even for a bestseller. I think that that's the long-term fate of TV and movies, especially as the generation that was weened on them dies off and a new generation that watched much less growing up comes of age.

82

I assume there's some historical reason for this, but currently, the way scene releases reach most people seems to consist of:

  1. Sites that track releases post the nfo file of the release; these sites generally don't provide the release itself.

  2. People then look for the release via various channels and download it.

Wouldn't it make sense for the nfo to contain the checksum of the actual release, letting pirates verify unmodified copies of it and making it easier to avoid versions that have been modified in various ways?

Obviously you'd still have to trust both the site where you got the NFO (and therefore the checksum) and the people who made the original release, but those are usually relatively trustworthy, being known people who have handled a lot of releases with no problems - a lot of the danger of viruses and the like in software piracy comes from the risk of middlemen adding something.

1474
submitted 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) by Yglorba@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com

They could have easily crammed the Steam Deck full of stuff to make it hard to use for piracy - locking down everything, making it usable only to play games you legitimately own, force you to go through who knows what hoops in order to play games on it. That's what Nintendo or Apple or most other companies do.

But they didn't, because they realized they didn't have to. It's 100% possible to put pirated games on the Steam Deck - in fact, it's as easy as it could reasonably be. You copy it over, you wire it up to Steam, if it's a non-Linux game you set it up with Proton or whatever else you want to use to run it, bam. You can now run it in Steam just as easily as a normal Steam game (usually.) If you want something similar to cloud saves you can even set up SyncThing for that.

But all of that is a lot of work, and after all that you still don't have automatic updates, and some games won't run this way for one reason or another even though they'll run if you own them (usually, I assume, because of Steam Deck specific tweaks or install stuff that are only used when you're running them on the Deck via the normal method.) Some of this you can work around but it's even more hoops.

Whereas if you own a game it's just push a button and play. They made legitimately owning a game more convenient than piracy, and they did it without relying on DRM or anything that restricts or annoys legitimate users at all - even if a game has a DRM-free GOG version, owning it on Steam will still make it easier to play on the Steam Deck.

52
submitted 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) by Yglorba@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Counting only games in the modern era, when Denuvo started to charge monthly fees. And of course it might vary from game to game depending on sales, but...

I know that Square-Enix often removes it six months after release, and at a glance it looks like 2K often removes it roughly a year after release.

I'm curious if anyone has tracked this for other games so we can have a sense of which games are likely to have it removed when. I was eying a game when it suddenly occurred to me to think "wait, doesn't this company usually remove Denuvo around now?"

It might even be useful to create a tracking document of games where Denuvo has been removed by the publisher, divided by publisher (and perhaps with a few other notes that might affect it, like Steam review, metacritic, or sales figures if we can find them) to help us get a sense of where things stand in that regard.

[-] Yglorba@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 10 months ago

If I recall correctly, CODEX's Denuvo cracker was Empress anyway, so it has been just her for a long while now. There have been one or two cracks by other people for games using ancient versions of Denuvo that nobody bothered to crack before, but she's the only one doing anything with Denuvo's current version.

[-] Yglorba@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 10 months ago

Yeah, it says that they're all "well we would have rather do it the other way for your sakes" but the fact is that if they thought they could reliably obtain money this way they'd be doing it already. A ton of legal fees are going to be wasted pursuing people they can't catch for one reason or another, meaning that their desire to make the pirates pay their costs isn't going to work as reliably as they'd want.

[-] Yglorba@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I think that it's because now we're starting to get judges who have an actual understanding of the internet and its issues. In the past, lawyers for copyright holders could make up whatever theories of it they wanted and frame things in whatever way benefits them the most; that's no longer the case - these judges (including the original trial judge, the appeals judges, and the Canadian Supreme Court, who handed down the original decision at stake here) plainly understand in at least a basic way how the internet is used, what an IP address is, and the complexities of assigning responsibility related to one.

Whereas ten or twenty years ago you would have had judges who mostly depended on the plaintiff's lawyers for their understanding and who would therefore basically give them anything they asked for.

[-] Yglorba@lemmy.dbzer0.com 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The only reason people will continue using Unity is because they've already made )or are in the process of making) a game using it and switching to something else would waste massive amounts of time and effort. Unity is depending on this - this is basically them squeezing everything out of existing customers without regard for long term growth.

Remember, the whole idea here is that Unity is demanding payments for already existing games. They clearly don't care about whether people keep using Unity for new games in the future; the executives who made this decision will have cashed out and will be long gone by the time all the existing Unity games in the pipeline are done and things dry up.

[-] Yglorba@lemmy.dbzer0.com 21 points 1 year ago

The most hilarious thing about this is that, assuming crackers prevent Unity games from phoning home, the best way to support game developers would be to buy their game and then only play the cracked version, never installing the version you purchased.

[-] Yglorba@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The easiest way to figure out where a game is writing its saves is to load it up in Sandboxie and save your game, then check sandboxie's box content to see what got updated or saved and where.

Also, Cyberpunk is on GOG (because it's made by the people who run GOG), there's no need to get it through DODI unless you have a severely restricted internet connection and therefore desperately need the smaller size of a repack - you can get the clean gog installer from gog-games. You should just be able to install the latest GOG version over the old version with no difficulty.

[-] Yglorba@lemmy.dbzer0.com 31 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Why was the post on this removed from the Reddit Piracy sub? I find that slightly alarming.

view more: next ›

Yglorba

joined 1 year ago