🚀 go-pugleaf

Legitimate purchasers don't bother to buy this rubbish so why is he
using so much copy protection? I can't think of a good reason any
warezmonkeys would want to waste the energy to rip one of his valuable
intellectual properties.

(From a game developer on the Ubisoft forums)
Issues concerning Starforce.

1. They are based in Moscow so exempt from a number of the laws that
we in the West rely upon. The 3rd Party Companies that use their copy
protection are not exempt.

2. In Windows XP Starforce gives Ring 0 (super user level access) to
Ring 3 (Standard users). In normal English this basically means that
any third party application such as Trojans or Viri are given the
ability to have full access the both software and hardware.

3. As many of you will be aware XP does have DMA/IDE issue that’s
dates back to its creation. In which if packets are lost during the
reading or writing of a disk. XP interprets this as an error and steps
the IDE speed down. Eventually it will revert to 16bit compatibility
mode rendering a CD/DVD writer virtually unusable. In some
circumstances certain drives cannot cope with this mode and it results
in physical hardware failure (Most commonly in multiformat CD/DVD
writer drives). A sure sign of this step down occurring is that the
burn speeds will get slower and slower (no matter what speed you
select to burn at). Starforce on a regular basis triggers this silent
step down. Until it reaches the latter stages most peeps do not even
realise it is happening.

Excluding the Hardware failure, the normal way to cure this is to
uninstall all the CD/DVD drivers and the Primary/Secondary IDE
controllers. (Then reboot). If you did not know about Starforce, you
can now be faced with another problem. Normally windows searches and
reinstalls the drivers. However with Starforce present this can cause
the system to either fail to find the hardware or fail to find the
drivers. Creating the illusion that the hardware has failed.

This gets even worse if you have SCSI hardware/virtual drives. SCSI
virtual printer driver (basically any SCSI hardware/Virtual drivers
present) As these may have to be removed before the other hardware
becomes visible.

4. Because Starforce are aware of these issues (Including the Trojan
Gateway) this is exempt from the EULA and could be deemed as "Gaining
access with malicious intent". Not only would starforce be liable, but
also the 3rd party company that endorsed/used that application.
<mothman>


On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 09:56:24 -0500, Baked <baked@nowhere.invalid>
wrote:

>http://www.3000ad.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=22;t=000026
>
>My head hurt after reading that. (paste below)
>
>>posted 01-01-2006 06:50 AM      
>>
>>I am starting this topic to outline the various copy
>>protection schemes used and in what versions of our games.
>>
>>BCM, BCM Gold & UC (original) -: These use the CD-ROM based Macrovision
>>SafeDisc protection. You get a cd-key for use in multiplayer (where
>>applicable). Patches are created in house and released as they become
>>available.
>>
>>UCAWA & UC Gold -: These games are distributed through online retailers.
>>As such, there are three different online activation schemes being used
>>for each proprietary system.
>>
>>   1. The version bought directly from 3000AD through BMT Micro (CD-ROM)
>>and Digital River (download), use Starforce Proactive. This provides a
>>cd-key with two activations. The cd-key is also required for
>>multiplayer.
>>
>>      After you have used up both activations, you have to provide proof
>>of purchase and a reason for requesting a new cd-key directly to
>>support@3000ad.com. You will need to provide the following information :
>>
>>
>>      (1) First & Last name
>>      (2) Where you purchased the game
>>      (3) Existing CD-KEY
>>      (4) Reason for wanting a new CD-KEY
>>      (5) The subject of the email must contain the FULL name of the
>>game for which you are writing about, otherwise our spam guard will
>>reject it and we'll never get to see it.
>>
>>
>>
>>      We reserve the right to not issue new CD-KEYs to people who are
>>suspect. For example, each time a CD-KEY is activated, we know. We also
>>know which IP is was activated from. And once you are given a new
>>CD-KEY, the older one is invalidated and rendered useless.
>>
>>      Your cd-key will be invalidated only if you make drastic changes
>>to your computer hardware. This is the same way that WinXP and other DRM
>>protected software work.
>>
>>
>>      If your CD-KEY won't activate at the game screen, go to the
>>Starforce activation website and activate it there using the CD-KEY and
>>the hardware code that is displayed.
>>
>>   2. The version bought from IGN's Direct2Drive (download) uses a
>>licensed (from TryMedia) version of ActiveMark protection system. This
>>has an automatic activation system. You can also re-install the game a
>>number of times, but it is my understanding that this system is a bit
>>more lenient in the number of times you can do that. More information is
>>available on their site. If you use up your activations, you have to
>>contact IGN directly. You also get a cd-key for multiplayer.
>>
>>   3. The version bought from TryMedia's Trygames portal also uses their
>>proprietary ActiveMark protection system, but with different
>>configurations (i.e. it is different from the IGN version). If you use
>>up your activations, you have to contact TryMedia directly. You also get
>>a cd-key for multiplayer.
>>
>>
>>As to patching. You cannot use one patch on another system. For example,
>>both ActiveMark versions protect not only the executables, but also a
>>bunch of INI files. So if you downloaded the Starforce version patch, it
>>won't work on any other version. And vice versa.
>>
>>The reason patches for the Starforce version will always be out first,
>>followed by other versions, sometimes weeks later, is because we only
>>protect this version in house and immediately make it available for
>>download.
>>
>>For the ActiveMark protected versions, the pure unprotected files have
>>to be sent off to their support people who then protect them and send
>>back to us. Once we get them back, the patch is created and uploaded.
>>
>>So when making your decision as to which version to purchase, think
>>carefully about what is convenient and more important to you.
>>
>>[ 01-07-2006, 08:22 PM: Message edited by: Supreme Cmdr ]
>>
>>--------------------
>>President, 3000AD Inc.
>>Designer/Lead Developer
>>The Battlecruiser Series
>>Warmonger Specs
>>
>>"Squirrels with very cold paws have less trouble getting into peanut
>>butter than the average uninitiated Homo Sapien has in getting into a
>>Battlecruiser game. - Tim Stone, PC Gamer UK #133 Review"

"Baked" <baked@nowhere.invalid> wrote in message 
news:va4is1l9l3qdskpt523egpsqrohpn4r8lg@4ax.com...
> Legitimate purchasers don't bother to buy this rubbish so why is he
> using so much copy protection? I can't think of a good reason any
> warezmonkeys would want to waste the energy to rip one of his valuable
> intellectual properties.

Oh god a DS game with Starforce protection and a strict key activation 
scheme - it just doesn't get any worse than that.    I don't think I've ever 
seen a DS game on the warez scene. 

On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 12:54:08 -0800, "bioderm"
<shavolski@ladaviski.com> wrote:

>Oh god a DS game with Starforce protection and a strict key activation 
>scheme - it just doesn't get any worse than that.    I don't think I've ever 
>seen a DS game on the warez scene. 

No one wants it, why would you? :-)

Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of 
ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent 
virtue is the equal sharing of misery.
- Winston Churchill

"JustBoo" <JustBoo@BooWho.com> wrote in message 
news:rbqis11a31onpr1h87u96fq3opq11csr47@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 12:54:08 -0800, "bioderm"
> <shavolski@ladaviski.com> wrote:
>
>>Oh god a DS game with Starforce protection and a strict key activation
>>scheme - it just doesn't get any worse than that.    I don't think I've 
>>ever
>>seen a DS game on the warez scene.
>
> No one wants it, why would you? :-)
>
> Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of
> ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent
> virtue is the equal sharing of misery.
> - Winston Churchill

Heh trust me I don't want it.  I'd rather toss my PC into a swimming pool 
than install anything   made by the Taco Commander. 

On or about Sat, 14 Jan 2006 09:56:24 -0500, some person or persons unknown
calling themselves Baked ", did cause
<n14is15a00oik4e19f0jbqjmerbnk9hqc9@4ax.com> to appear on my glass typewriter
and spake thus:
>
>http://www.3000ad.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=22;t=000026
>
>My head hurt after reading that. (paste below)
>
>>posted 01-01-2006 06:50 AM      
>>
>>I am starting this topic to outline the various copy
>>protection schemes used and in what versions of our games.
>>

snip

>>
>>--------------------
>>President, 3000AD Inc.
>>Designer/Lead Developer
>>The Battlecruiser Series
>>Warmonger Specs
>>
>>"Squirrels with very cold paws have less trouble getting into peanut
>>butter than the average uninitiated Homo Sapien has in getting into a
>>Battlecruiser game. - Tim Stone, PC Gamer UK #133 Review"

Only the Taco Commander would take a quote that was probably meant as an insult
and put it in his sig.

What is it, like 10 years that the "Battlecruiser Series" has been going on?
I remember when "DR" Smart was promising a patch EVERY DAY until things settled
down.  Now you can't even play the game without jumping through hoops.

mothman wrote:
> (From a game developer on the Ubisoft forums)
> Issues concerning Starforce.
>
> 1. They are based in Moscow so exempt from a number of the laws that
> we in the West rely upon. The 3rd Party Companies that use their copy
> protection are not exempt.
>
> 2. In Windows XP Starforce gives Ring 0 (super user level access) to
> Ring 3 (Standard users). In normal English this basically means that
> any third party application such as Trojans or Viri are given the
> ability to have full access the both software and hardware.
>
> 3. As many of you will be aware XP does have DMA/IDE issue that's
> dates back to its creation. In which if packets are lost during the
> reading or writing of a disk. XP interprets this as an error and steps
> the IDE speed down. Eventually it will revert to 16bit compatibility
> mode rendering a CD/DVD writer virtually unusable. In some
> circumstances certain drives cannot cope with this mode and it results
> in physical hardware failure (Most commonly in multiformat CD/DVD
> writer drives). A sure sign of this step down occurring is that the
> burn speeds will get slower and slower (no matter what speed you
> select to burn at). Starforce on a regular basis triggers this silent
> step down. Until it reaches the latter stages most peeps do not even
> realise it is happening.
>
> Excluding the Hardware failure, the normal way to cure this is to
> uninstall all the CD/DVD drivers and the Primary/Secondary IDE
> controllers. (Then reboot). If you did not know about Starforce, you
> can now be faced with another problem. Normally windows searches and
> reinstalls the drivers. However with Starforce present this can cause
> the system to either fail to find the hardware or fail to find the
> drivers. Creating the illusion that the hardware has failed.
>
> This gets even worse if you have SCSI hardware/virtual drives. SCSI
> virtual printer driver (basically any SCSI hardware/Virtual drivers
> present) As these may have to be removed before the other hardware
> becomes visible.
>
> 4. Because Starforce are aware of these issues (Including the Trojan
> Gateway) this is exempt from the EULA and could be deemed as "Gaining
> access with malicious intent". Not only would starforce be liable, but
> also the 3rd party company that endorsed/used that application.
> <mothman>
>
>
> On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 09:56:24 -0500, Baked <baked@nowhere.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> >http://www.3000ad.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=22;t=000026
> >
> >My head hurt after reading that. (paste below)
> >
> >>posted 01-01-2006 06:50 AM

> >>[ 01-07-2006, 08:22 PM: Message edited by: Supreme Cmdr ]
> >>

I don't think anyone here has a shadow of a doubt that good old Taco
commander is getting sponsored by starforce by letting his fans
*cough*suckers*cough* be starforce's guinea pigs.

On 14 Jan 2006 20:19:28 -0800, Dosferatu <dosferatu_pjl@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>
>What is it, like 10 years that the "Battlecruiser Series" has been going on?
>I remember when "DR" Smart was promising a patch EVERY DAY until things settled
>down.  Now you can't even play the game without jumping through hoops

The last UC patch (2.30) is pretty stable, and I think that the copy
protection for it has already been cracked. I've never seen a warez
version, but then again, I don't go looking for warez games anyway.

The protection scheme for AWA is a complete joke from hell. Every
single BC game will eventually bork the install. It's inevitable. With
the prior games, you just uninstalled, reinstalled, repatched and
restart, or if you were smart (no pun intended), you kept the savegame
and could just go from there.

With AWA, when the game goes tits up, sometimes so does the
activation. Not always, but I've had to get 3 seperate activation
codes from Derek, until I said screw it and shelved the game. It isn't
any different then BCM or UC anyway..and in alot of ways, much worse
IMO. =P

Shingen wrote:
> The last UC patch (2.30) is pretty stable, and I think that the copy
> protection for it has already been cracked. I've never seen a warez
> version, but then again, I don't go looking for warez games anyway.

Couldn't find any signs of it, most likely because it's just not worth 
it to crack. No one would even waste the time or bandwidth to download 
it. :P

TheSmokingGnu

On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 22:54:52 -0800, TheSmokingGnu
<anonymityisavirtue@1111011010011.com> wrote:

>Shingen wrote:
>> The last UC patch (2.30) is pretty stable, and I think that the copy
>> protection for it has already been cracked. I've never seen a warez
>> version, but then again, I don't go looking for warez games anyway.
>
>Couldn't find any signs of it, most likely because it's just not worth 
>it to crack. No one would even waste the time or bandwidth to download 
>it. :P
>
>TheSmokingGnu
No dude.. I meant a NOCD crack. But since you don't play the game, why
care?

On Sat, 11 Feb 2006 22:36:22 GMT, Shingen
<shingen@aolsuks.sbcglobal.net> wrote:


>The last UC patch (2.30) is pretty stable, 

Do you mean v2.00.30.12? That's the most recent version I saw at The
Patches Scrolls.