Slashdot Mirror


Everquest Server Emulator In Beta

Zummi writes: "The people at HackersQuest have released a beta of their Everquest server emulator. " Verant's reaction should be interesting to watch -- EthernalQuest looks cool, and will hopefully look better than the 1992 graphics of Everquest.

165 comments

  1. Free servers? by don_carnage · · Score: 2
    I imagine that Verant's reaction would be similar to that of the MPAA's with DeCSS: lawsuit.

    But what if there were free servers? Do you think more people would play, or would they simply want to be where everyone else was playing.?

    --

    1. Re:Free servers? by ^_^x · · Score: 1

      I think I'd look into getting a copy if there were populated, free servers. I remember looking at EQ and thinking "hey, that looks like it could be pretty fun. No way I'm going to pay to play though."

      How many times do they want us to buy their products? I can understand that they probably keep their systems working a lot smoother than battle.net, but still, when I buy a game, I want it to be mine.

    2. Re:Free servers? by Donavan · · Score: 1

      If the game was static pay for play would really suck. But the game has new content added to the world on a regular basis. Not to mention special events, live GM run quests and the like that all require real live people to run. The amount of money per month to play EQ is less than I pay for lunch. And even though I rarely play these days I still think I'm getting my money's worth.

    3. Re:Free servers? by don_carnage · · Score: 1
      Sure, you get new and exciting content (and someone has to pay for the upkeep of the servers and personel to run them,) but how do you feel about paying $40 for the game and an additional $120 for a year's subscription.

      Granted, a lot of people will pay much more than $160/year on entertainment (movies, books, cds, etc), but don't you think the original game should be free?

      --

    4. Re:Free servers? by interiot · · Score: 1

      Well, it's not very similar to the MPAA case in at least one respect: the emulators don't facilitate "stealing" of copyrighted data.

    5. Re:Free servers? by Xerophorex · · Score: 4

      i pay over $100/month for lunch. i would never pay that much for entertainment!

    6. Re:Free servers? by don_carnage · · Score: 1

      No...just stealing a service by running free servers. This would, ultimately, lead to less people paying for the service provided by Verant.

      --

    7. Re:Free servers? by interiot · · Score: 2

      Free ISP's result in less people paying for service provided by AOL. So?

    8. Re:Free servers? by joshsisk · · Score: 1

      No...just stealing a service by running free servers. This would, ultimately, lead to less people paying for the service provided by Verant.

      They aren't really stealing a service... It's just like the Bleem! case... Some people managed to figure out how Everquest's network works, and made their own version. As long as they didn't use any of Verant's code, then they haven't stolen anything. I doubt they could get into much trouble, unless their server is using Verant code to run. You could say Bleem! is stealing from Sony, too... But the courts (so far) feel otherwise.

      Josh Sisk

    9. Re:Free servers? by don_carnage · · Score: 1
      Yep. That's just one of the many freedoms that we have in the US. I can set up a shop that sells the same thing you're selling for less right next door and drive you out of business (as long as I can keep myself in business.)

      Necessity if the mother of invention: and thus we have the DeCSS source and free EverQuest servers...

      --

    10. Re:Free servers? by don_carnage · · Score: 1
      I suppose you are right -- it isn't necesarily stealing, but it's definately subverting the system.

      For example, here in the city, at all of the parking meters, you get the first 10 minutes free by turning the dial. Now, if everyone walking down the street were to turn the dials on the parking meters, then no one would have to pay for parking and the city wouldn't make any money, right?

      It's called civil disobedience and it lands a lot of people in jail. One woman was arrested for 'interfering' with police when she was caught pumping money into the meters as the cops were making their way down the street writing tickets.

      That's the way I see this, Napster, DeCSS and all of the others -- civil disobedience that someone will eventually find a way to punish you for.

      --

    11. Re:Free servers? by haystor · · Score: 1
      Some of the things would be stealing though. For instance, if you talked to an NPC, and they said, "Hello I am chief of the NPC's" or some other nonsense like that. If that speech comes from the server side, Hackersquest would be quilty of copyright infringement if they copied the storylines from the game.

      There are many instances where original text comes from the server, and copying this to the emulator would be theft.

      --
      t
    12. Re:Free servers? by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      No...just stealing a service by running free servers.

      What service is being stolen?

      That would only make sense if HackerQuest's server somehow offloaded some of the work to EverQuest, kinda like a proxy. I was under the impression that HackerQuest is a complete replacement for EverQuest's servers.


      ---
      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    13. Re:Free servers? by DrSkwid · · Score: 1

      if they just stop so can you

      EQ is great and I don't mind paying 'cos I know whats involved keeping 20k people connected
      .oO0Oo.

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    14. Re:Free servers? by Skid · · Score: 1

      They'd better sue all those MUDs out there that provide essentially the same thing, just not as pretty... oh, and don't forget suing Slashdot, since time I'm reading Slashdot is time I'm not playing EverQuest. Break, give me.
      --
      These are *MY* opinions.

      --
      These are *MY* opinions.
      They will not be *YOUR* opinions until the Orbital Mind Control Lasers are operati
    15. Re:Free servers? by StarKruzr · · Score: 1

      Question: couldn't you buy the game, play it on one of these free servers, and not pay a subscription fee?

      Email me.
      Don't trust anyone over 90000.

      --

      +++ATH0
  2. They should take it with the same stride OSI did by Vicegrip · · Score: 1

    UO has seen many custom servers built for it... in the end, setting up a game server depends largely on how redundant your backend is and how much of a pipe you can afford.
    If UO is any precedent, Verant has nothing to worry about.

    --
    Do not spread "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0" over the internet, thank you.
  3. They will behave like Origin (UO) did... by SClitheroe · · Score: 4

    When the Ultima Online server emulators came out, Origin threatened to cancel your subscription with the official service. This was explicitly written into the license agreement for the game. If you check the license agreement for EverQuest, I bet it's the same thing.

    Origin also released several client-side patches which required additional reverse-engineering on the part of the emulator authors. Officially it was encryption to reduce "cheating". When I left the UO scene, it was bad enough that only certain patch levels of the client worked with the emulators, but were too old to work with the offical servers. Again, I'd bet the EQ folks will do something similar.

    1. Re:They will behave like Origin (UO) did... by shren · · Score: 1

      They don't have the reasons to behave like Origin did.

      UO's full selling feature is the community. "Come join our vast community of gamers!" The resource system is boring, the monster AI is abysmal, the training system leaves a lot to be desired. UO is all about the community - interacting, in one form or another, with other players.

      You can get community in an Emulated UO just as easily as you can in the Official UO.

      But Verant has some useful and interesting code on the server side. There are things in EQ that are actually worth interacting with. The terrain is reasonably immersive. The monsters arn't as dumb as rocks. The EQ server contributes a bit more to your play experience, as compared to the UO server, which just passes the Corp Por of the pk from his machine to yours.

      --
      Maybe the state's highest function is to grind out insoluble problems. (Zelazny, Hall of Mirrors)
    2. Re:They will behave like Origin (UO) did... by Quarters · · Score: 1

      Do you really believe that EQ is pushing terrain data down your pipe in real-time as you play?

    3. Re:They will behave like Origin (UO) did... by Paradise_Pete · · Score: 1
      States with a "shall-issue" gun permit law have an 84% reduction in multiple victim shootings.

      The "Shall-issue" law, so named after the terrible Gene Shallit tragedy in which the bullet grazed his upper lip, resulting in a scar that from far away looks like an absurdly large mustache.

      -Pete

    4. Re:They will behave like Origin (UO) did... by ferat · · Score: 1

      They tried this when ShowEQ showed up. They kept changing the coding of the messages to stop showeq. Game performance was terrible, there was a patch every day or so. Customers were torqued off. Every time, about an hour after the servers came back up, a new ShowEQ version would be released that dealt with the new encryption.

      Verant has stated that they are no longer gonna do this, cause it just ain't worth it.

      This emulator, if memory serves, is being written by the same people that do ShowEQ..

    5. Re:They will behave like Origin (UO) did... by shren · · Score: 1
      You are either a complete moron, or you haven't played UO in a long time, or both. The current dev team has fixed all these issues.

      Get a clue. I've played UO on and off since the beta, and all of the changes border on the cosmetic, with the fixes being gross hacks. You are just used to how much it sucks, and thus minor changes making it suck slightly less look like huge improvements to you.

      --
      Maybe the state's highest function is to grind out insoluble problems. (Zelazny, Hall of Mirrors)
  4. Yea another chance for people to sue by Mr+Krinkle · · Score: 1

    Even though they shouldn't. One day I am going to see a suit on here about a patent that is worthwhile. Or someone actually suing to protect their rights that are worth a damn. But with the patent suits 100 out of 100 I have seen the patent was a waste. I don't even need to mention my feelings on MP3s, DeCSS etc. OH well I sure am glad I'm spending my 40%, or however much, on income tax. At least Im not funding the creation of more lawyers. Oh wait state supported schools. Shit I'm paying taxes so that more lawyers can come out and crush little people like me for the big corporations until I pay their classmates 100s of thousands of dollars to protect me. God this is ridiculous. Oh well what a waste. Sorry

    --
    I am 31337 or something.
  5. Sad to say... by Kierthos · · Score: 1

    But HackersQuest is probably in for a major lawsuit. It's one thing to make a mod for Diablo II, which won't work on the Realms servers, but it's another thing entirely to make your own server for someone else's game like this.

    And yes, before it gets brought up, it's because Everquest is a pay-to-play game. If it was a free multi-player game (as in no cost to play multi-player) then the point would be moot. But the whole point of Everquest is to play online, and give X dollars a month to Sony.

    Sorry to say it, but they are cruising for a lawsuit....

    Kierthos

    --
    Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
    1. Re:Sad to say... by Golias · · Score: 2
      You seem to be under the impression that the game is a pay-per-play from Sony. It's not. Sony wrote a game and is selling it. A different company (Veriant) has an exclusive deal with Sony to host EQ servers.

      The monthly fees are for Variant's service, not Sony's software. If I sit at home and build a custom server (either a reverse-engineering job or a new game server from scratch) that lets me run the EQ client on it, I am not stealing anything. Ditto if I invite my friends over to play their EQ clients on my custom-built server. Ditto again if I put let people log on to it over the Internet for free.

      If I charge for the service, then I might be in conflict with the agreement between Variant and Sony, but that is mostly their problem... I still am doing nothing illegal.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

  6. 1992? by NNKK · · Score: 1

    you're being extremely unfair... the graphics are a lot better than Quake (which was released in 96) and at least on par with Quake2's graphics... of course since you've OBVIOUSLY played the game and thus can make a fair comment about it, you must already know this

    1. Re:1992? by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Id like to see the EQ your playing. Q2s graphics are far superior.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:1992? by mr_froggy240 · · Score: 1

      Face it, Everquests graphics were pretty bad. The game was fun but the graphics sucked. Asherons call had better graphics but was not as much fun to play.

    3. Re:1992? by Eso · · Score: 1

      Really! AC had a cool character system that allowed much more diversity amongst players, but the graphics blew ass in it!

    4. Re:1992? by NNKK · · Score: 1

      I do belive we've reached the point now where even slashdotters MUST have great graphics in a game...
      are the graphics in Everquest perfect? hell no... but then the graphics in other games aren't perfect either.. this is an inherent issue with computer games, graphics can't be perfect.
      and in a project as large as Everquest they're sure as hell not going to be perfect, but they did a DAMN GOOD JOB
      and to the other guy, yes they are on par with Quake2's graphics, I'd suggest you actually play the game before you bash its graphics

  7. why by Lord+Omlette · · Score: 1

    Is this under Your Rights Online instead of Games? We've seen plenty of emulators get sued, but plenty of emulators go on with no interference. If no use of copyrighted or NDAed [sp] materials were involved, then there's not much of a case...

    Before they started sucking ass, FSGS used to be the premiere alternative Battle.net. They still are because they never released their source code and drove all the other bnet servers into oblivion. They'll have Diablo II support 'soon.' Blizzard initially sued people making stuff outta starcraft (anyone remember the starhack flap?) but eventually stopped. (actually it was the spa representing someone or other, i forget)

    The big question is (i'm on a sloooooooooow ass modem): is it open source? If so, Verant's gonna have a field day taking down EVERYone who's working on it.
    --
    Peace,
    Lord Omlette
    ICQ# 77863057

    --
    [o]_O
  8. Graphics will stay the same by stevemoink · · Score: 1

    They're trying to emulate Everquest, not improve upon it. It will look the same, but you will be able to do fun stuff like park 5 dragons outside the gates of Qeynos.

    You'd have to Ask Milo how to improve upon the graphics.

    ...steve

    1. Re:Graphics will stay the same by bighead_wong · · Score: 3

      They're trying to emulate Everquest . . . It will look the same

      (correct, afaik).

      They wrote an eq server, which should have nothing to do with the quality of the graphics. If the servers did, it would clog up the bandwidth. The way this probably works (and all the UO servers did) was read the old files. All it is is a server, not a completely repackaged client as well.

      although, fwiw . . . if you want to improve the graphics, crack their format (I don't have eq, but am assuming that it isn't just a straightforward known standard?) and change them. As long as you don't don't change it too dramatically, I'm guessing it would still work . . .

      --

      --

      --
      Whom does Larry Wall quote in /his/ sig?
    2. Re:Graphics will stay the same by Eso · · Score: 1

      According to Milo (from Ask Milo), they use a proprietary plugin for 3DSMax, but everything else they use (Maya, etc) is standard.

  9. I've been playing EQ since April... by Dirtside · · Score: 5
    ...and I fairly closely follow Verant's various actions as evidenced by what's on their boards. I don't think Verant is going to panic over this; they've known about it for a long time and probably will ignore it. For one thing, even if people do start playing on "public" servers, it's going to be a totally different experience from actually playing EQ on Verant's servers. Not much, if any, of the content is going to be there; basically it's a way of emulating the EQ engine. People will be able to run their own servers, sure, but without major hardware they aren't going to be able to support many players at once.

    There's probably a lot more to be said about this, but I don't think Verant is going to freak out. There's not much they can do, and I don't think it's going to really affect their business anyway.

    --
    "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
    1. Re:I've been playing EQ since April... by Golias · · Score: 3
      Variant's server farm hosts a couple thousand players on each machine, so you are right that it would be difficult for a home brew job to handle the traffic of just one of the official EQ servers... But what might come about is something closer to the old MUD culture... hundreds or even thousands of mini-EQ servers sprining up to support, oh, say 100 players at a time.

      For a hard-core EQ player (as I once was), the idea of having a private server, just for your own guild, is quite appealing.

      Also, server owners will be able to express some creativity of their own, possibly building new worlds that are every bit as intersting as the standard one, if not more so.

      This could be the one thing that gets me to start playing EQ again. I would totally get into the chance to play on a server that isn't busting at the seams, jam-packed with players all competing for the same spawning points. Some of the most fun times I had playing EQ was during off-peak hours, when I could go to a less popular zone and find only two or three other players there.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    2. Re:I've been playing EQ since April... by Alternity · · Score: 2

      Well I was an UO player for long, and yes you are right, the experience of playing on a public shard is much different than that of playing on the company's server. But for my part I had my best UO experiences on smaller shards that are not over crowded, where you still have a chance to make yourself a name and where you know most of the important characters after a couple of weeks. Also small public shard are often "owned" by people modifying the setting where the game takes place, in UO an admin could even customize a lot of things, create new character classes with their own limitations with a scripting language. So I think that those looking for a better roleplaying experience and an home away from overcrowded worlds will quickly flee the official EQ's server and move to smaller, free public servers.

      --


      "If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear"
    3. Re:I've been playing EQ since April... by IronChef · · Score: 1


      I think the emulator guys may be in trouble from a non-technical standpoint: they could be accused of diluting the strength of Sony's EverQuest brand, not the actual act of reverse-engineering. (which is supposedly strongly protected in the EU anyway.)

      Sony tried this with Connectix and failed, as I recall.

      Frankly, I hope these guys get away with it. Though I would rather see a full client/server open source MMORPG package...

      (off-topic rant begins)
      A free client/server MMORPG package with an emphasis on good content creation tools would be a wonderful thing. They say it takes MONTHS just to do the TERRAIN for a new EQ zone. I have worked with custom game development tools and I have to say that sound pathetic -- then again, our coders kicked some serious ass.

      If you had killer tools and an adequate client/server package people would rapidly develop some very cool worlds. This seems like a better use of time than reverse-engineering EQ, but I am not going to look a gift emulator in the mouth.
      (end rant)

  10. EULA for the client by zear0 · · Score: 1

    I haven't read it in awhile... I'm sure it will change to disallow using the client with non-sanctioned servers.

  11. Emulator and the US by jjr · · Score: 2

    I wonder if the US will start making emulators iilegal to even have. You can not import from another country let hope this does not happen.

  12. EULA by barogers@iserv.net · · Score: 5

    As of today, after the latest patch...


    Please remember to review the current terms and conditions of the User Agreement and Software License. Thank you.


    USER AGREEMENT AND SOFTWARE LICENSE

    THIS AGREEMENT DESCRIBES THE TERMS ON WHICH SONY COMPUTER ENTERTAINMENT AMERICA INC. OFFERS YOU ACCESS TO AN ACCOUNT (THE "ACCOUNT") TO PLAY THE EVERQUEST ONLINE FANTASY ROLE PLAYING COMPUTER GAME (THE "GAME"). BY PRESSING THE "I ACCEPT" BUTTON, YOU ACCEPT THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS BELOW. BY PRESSING THE "DECLINE" BUTTON, YOU DECLINE OUR OFFER, IN WHICH CASE YOU SHOULD CONTACT YOUR RETAILER REGARDING ITS RETURN POLICY FOR THE EVERQUEST CD-ROM. If you have any questions regarding these terms and conditions, please contact customer service at eqmail@verant.com.

    1. Accounts are available only to adults or, in their discretion, their minor child. If you are a minor, your parent(s) or guardian(s) must complete the registration process, in which case they will take full responsibility for all obligations under this Agreement. By clicking the "I Accept" button and providing us with a credit card number, you represent that you are an adult and are either accepting this Agreement on behalf of yourself or your child. You may not transfer or share your Account with anyone, except that if you are a parent or guardian, you may permit one child to use the Account instead of you (in which case you may not use that Account). You are liable for all activities conducted through the Account, and parents or guardians are liable for the activities of their child. Corporations and other entities are not eligible to procure Accounts.

    2. To play the Game, you must (a) purchase the EverQuest game CD-ROM (the "CD-ROM"), which includes software required for the Game (the "Software"), (b) have a fully paid Account, and (c) have an Internet connection (which we do not provide) to access your Account. In addition to any fees described herein, you are responsible for paying all applicable taxes (including those we are not required to collect) and for all hardware, software, service and other costs you incur to access your Account. Neither this Agreement nor your Account entitles you to any subsequent releases of the Software, nor to any expansion packs or similar ancillary products. You understand that we may update or otherwise enhance the Software at any time and in doing so incur no obligation to furnish such updates to you pursuant to this Agreement.

    3. We may amend this Agreement at any time in our sole discretion. Amendments shall be communicated to you at the time you log into your Account. Such amendments shall be effective whenever we make the notification available for your review.

    4. Upon registration, you must select a password. You may not disclose your password to any third party. We never ask you for your password by telephone or email, and you should not disclose it this way if someone asks you to do so. There may be an additional charge to reissue lost passwords. Although we may offer a feature that allows you to "save" or "remember" your password on your hard drive, please note that third parties may be able to access your computer and thus your Account.

    5. We describe our fees and billing procedures at www.everquest.com, which are incorporated by reference. All fees are stated in U.S. Dollars. All fees are prepaid and non-refundable. Upon your acceptance of these terms, we will automatically charge your credit card the Account fee plus any applicable taxes we are required to collect, and you authorize us to do so. Thereafter, on the applicable anniversary, we will charge your credit card the then-current renewal rate plus any applicable taxes we are required to collect, and you authorize us to do so. If we are unable to process your credit card at a renewal period, your Account may be immediately terminated.

    6. We may terminate this Agreement (including your Software license and your Account) immediately and without notice if you breach this Agreement or repeatedly infringe any third party intellectual property rights, or if we are unable to verify or authenticate any information you provide to us, or upon gameplay, chat or any player activity whatsoever which is, in our sole discretion, inappropriate and/or in violation of the spirit of the Game as set forth in the player rules of conduct, which are posted at www.everquest.com. If we terminate this Agreement under these circumstances, you will lose access to your Account for the balance of any prepaid period without any refund. We may also terminate this Agreement if we decide, in our sole discretion, to discontinue offering the Game, in which case we may provide you with a prorated refund of any prepaid amounts.

    7. Subject to the terms of this Agreement, we hereby grant to you a non-exclusive license to use the Software solely in connection with playing the Game via an authorized and fully-paid Account. You may not copy (except to make one necessary back-up copy), distribute, rent, lease, loan, modify or create derivative works, adapt, translate, perform, display, sublicense or transfer the Software. You may not copy any of the written materials accompanying the CD-ROM. You may not reverse engineer, disassemble or decompile the Software except to the extent that this restriction is expressly prohibited by applicable law. The Software may contain license management software that restricts your use of the Software.

    8. We and our suppliers shall retain ownership of all intellectual property rights relating to or residing in the CD-ROM, the Software and the Game. The Software is a "commercial item.

    9. You may not use any third party software to modify the Software to change Game play. You may not use our intellectual property rights contained in the Game or the Software to create or provide any other means through which the Game may be played by others, as through server emulators. You may not take any action which imposes an unreasonable or disproportionately large load on our infrastructure. You may not sell or auction any EverQuest characters, items, coin or copyrighted material.

    10. To obtain an Account, you will be required to choose both a login name and a player name. While you are encouraged to use a pseudonym, especially if you are a minor, you may not pick a name that violates anyone's trademarks, publicity rights or other proprietary rights.

    11. As part of your Account, you can upload content to our servers in various forms, such as in the selections you make for the Game and in chat rooms and similar user-to-user areas (collectively, your "Content"). Your Content shall not: (a) infringe any third party intellectual property, other proprietary or publicity/privacy rights; (b) violate any law or regulation; (c) be defamatory, obscene, child pornographic or harmful to minors; or (d) contain any viruses, trojan horses, worms, time bombs, cancelbots or other computer programming routines that are intended to damage, detrimentally interfere with, surreptitiously intercept or expropriate any system, data or personal information. We may take any action with respect to your Content if we believe it may create liability for us or may cause us to lose (in whole or in part) the services of our ISPs or other suppliers. You hereby grant to us a worldwide, perpetual, irrevocable, royalty-free, sublicenseable (through multiple tiers) right to exercise all intellectual property rights, in any media now known or not currently known, associated with your Content.

    12. We cannot ensure that your private communications and other personally identifiable information will not be disclosed to third parties. For example, we may be forced to disclose information to the government or third parties under certain circumstances, or third parties may unlawfully intercept or access transmissions or private communications. Additionally, we can (and you authorize us to) disclose any information about you to private entities, law enforcement or other government officials as we, in our sole discretion, believe necessary or appropriate to investigate or resolve possible problems or inquiries. Furthermore, if you request any technical support, you consent to our remote accessing and review of the computer you load the Software onto for purposes of support and debugging. You agree that we may communicate with you via email and any similar technology for any purpose relating to the Game, the Software and any services or software which may in the future be provided by us or on our behalf. You may choose to visit www.station.sony.com, the web site of Sony Online Entertainment Inc. ("The Station") if The Station offers services such as an EverQuest game themed chat room or other services of interest to you. You are subject to the terms and conditions, privacy customs and policies of Sony Online Entertainment Inc. while on The Station. Since we do not control the terms and conditions of use of The Station or of other web sites and/or privacy policies of third parties, different rules may apply to their use or disclosure of the personal information you disclose to others. Solely for the purpose of patching and updating the Game, you hereby grant us permission to (i) upload Game file information from the Everquest directory and (ii) download Game files to you.

    13. WE PROVIDE THE CD-ROM, THE SOFTWARE, THE ACCOUNT, THE GAME AND ALL OTHER SERVICES "AS IS." WE AND OUR SUPPLIERS EXPRESSLY DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS, IMPLIED OR STATUTORY, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF TITLE, NONINFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Without limiting the foregoing, we do not ensure continuous, error-free, secure or virus-free operation of the CD-ROM, the Software, the Game or your Account. Some states do not allow the disclaimer of implied warranties, so the foregoing disclaimer may not apply to you. This warranty gives you specific legal rights and you may also have other legal rights which vary from state to state.

    We are not liable for any delay or failure to perform resulting from any causes beyond our reasonable control. Further, we cannot and do not promise or ensure that you will be able to access your Account whenever you want, and there may be extended periods of time when you cannot access your Account.

    14. IN NO EVENT SHALL WE, OUR PARENT, OUR AFFILIATES OR OUR SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE TO YOU OR TO ANY THIRD PARTY FOR ANY LOST PROFITS OR SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (HOWEVER ARISING, INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE) ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH YOUR ACCOUNT, THE GAME, THE CD-ROM OR THIS AGREEMENT. OUR LIABILITY TO YOU OR ANY THIRD PARTIES IS LIMITED TO $100. Some states do not allow the foregoing limitations of liability, so they may not apply to you.

    15. You shall comply with all applicable laws regarding your use of the Software, your access to your Account and your playing of the Game. Without limiting the foregoing, you may not download, use or otherwise export or re-export the Software except in full compliance with all applicable laws and regulations.

    16. This Agreement is governed in all respects by the laws of the State of California as such laws are applied to agreements entered into and to be performed entirely within California between California residents. The UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods is expressly disclaimed. Both parties submit to personal jurisdiction in California and further agree that any cause of action relating to this Agreement shall be brought in a court in San Mateo County, California. If any provision of this Agreement is held to be invalid or unenforceable, such provision shall be struck and the remaining provisions shall be enforced. Our failure to act with respect to a breach by you or others does not waive our right to act with respect to subsequent or similar breaches. You may not assign or transfer this Agreement or your rights hereunder, and any attempt to the contrary is void. This Agreement sets forth the entire understanding and agreement between us and you with respect to the subject matter hereof. Except as provided above, this Agreement may not be amended except in a writing signed by both parties.

    17. All services hereunder are offered by Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc., located at 919 E. Hillsdale Boulevard, Foster City, California 94404. Our phone number is (858) 537-0898. Current rates for using the Game may be obtained from www.everquest.com, and such rates are subject to change at any time. If you are a California resident, you may have this same information emailed to you by sending a letter to the foregoing address with your email address and a request for this information.

    The Complaint Assistance Unit of the Division of Consumer Services of the Department of Consumer Affairs may be contacted in writing at 400 R Street, Sacramento, CA 95814, or by telephone at (800) 952-5210.

    Parental control protections (such as computer hardware, software, or filtering services) are commercially available that may assist you in limiting access to material that is harmful to minors. If you are interested in learning about these protections, information is available at http://www.worldvillage.com/wv/school/html/control .htm or other similar sites providing information on such protections.

    1. Re:EULA by Thalia · · Score: 2

      The EULA specifically permits using the CD software "solely in connection with playing the Game via an authorized and fully-paid Account." So, if you're using the CD to play on the emulator, you're in violation of clause 7 of the EULA.

      And, HackerQuest is in violation of clause 9, which specifically states:
      "You may not use our intellectual property rights contained in the Game or the Software to create or provide any other means through which the Game may be played by others, as through server emulators."

      Thus, if HackerQuest used any of the original code (copyrighted), or any of the characters or names (trademarked) owned by Sony, they can be sued under this license, and are likely to be found in violation. Of course, they could also be in violation of the copyright, and I expect Sony registered the copyright. In that case, HackerQuest could be in the hole for $150,000 statutory damages for each instance of copying code. (See 17 USC Section 504, http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/504.html, and note that the statutory damages have been increased recently http://www.pma-online.org/newsletr/apr9-00.html).

      On the other hand, EverQuest hasn't been enforcing this license. For example, the license also says "You may not sell or auction any EverQuest characters, items, coin or copyrighted material." Of course, if you go to Ebay you'll find tons of EverQuest stuff for sale.

    2. Re:EULA by DrSkwid · · Score: 1

      this has been part of the eula for at least three months

      since hq started the emu if i recall
      .oO0Oo.

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    3. Re:EULA by haystor · · Score: 1

      Of course if you launch the game to hackersquest, you might not ever get to that EULA.

      --
      t
    4. Re:EULA by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      Thus, if HackerQuest used any of the original code (copyrighted), or any of the characters or names (trademarked) owned by Sony, they can be sued under this license, and are likely to be found in violation. Of course, they could also be in violation of the copyright, and I expect Sony registered the copyright.

      You're right that could potentially be some copyright violation. (I would imagine, though, that Hackerquest is creating original material and not infringing. That's just speculation on my part, though.)

      As for the EULA... If anyone gets sued over violating the EULA, won't Sony have to somehow show that HackerQuest has accepted the terms of, and become bound by, the EULA? Unless they have some evidence that the other party made such an "agreement", then the terms of the agreement are irrelevant.

      By clicking on "Reply to This", you agree to the terms of the Sloppy Agreement. There is currently only one term: 1. Sloppy may ammend the Sloppy Agreement at his sole discretion.


      ---
      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    5. Re:EULA by drinkypoo · · Score: 2
      The EULA specifically permits using the CD software "solely in connection with playing the Game via an authorized and fully-paid Account." So, if you're using the CD to play on the emulator, you're in violation of clause 7 of the EULA.

      Definitions for authorized (From dictionary.com)

      1. To grant authority or power to.
      2. To give permission for; sanction: the city agency that authorizes construction projects.
      3. To be sufficient grounds for; justify.

      Nowhere in there does it say "Granted authority by Sony-Empire-Of-Doom Ltd." Their shrinkwrap agreement is, in this case, largely meaningless.

      On the other hand, if they change the agreement to read "Servers authorized by Sony" or Verison or whatever will be dictated by Sony's agreement with Verison, then yeah, that part of the shrinkwrap might actually mean something.

      And, HackerQuest is in violation of clause 9, which specifically states: "You may not use our intellectual property rights contained in the Game or the Software to create or provide any other means through which the Game may be played by others, as through server emulators."

      Except, as someone else mentioned, in Europe, where such activities are expressly protected, for the purposes of interoperability. Remember that shrinkwrap agreements lose their power where prohibited by local, state, or federal law. This applies internationally, as well.

      Thus, if HackerQuest used any of the original code (copyrighted), or any of the characters or names (trademarked) owned by Sony, they can be sued under this license, and are likely to be found in violation. Of course, they could also be in violation of the copyright, and I expect Sony registered the copyright. In that case, HackerQuest could be in the hole for $150,000 statutory damages for each instance of copying code. (See 17 USC Section 504, and note that the statutory damages have been increased.

      (Above paragraph edited for links)

      I'm sure they did, but your "thus" is inappropriate here. The 17 USC Section 504 that you quote doesn't apply to their reverse engineering under Euro law. I do agree that if they used names, terms, et cetera which are copyrighted, then they could get in a lot of trouble. I don't think they're copying code, though; I think they're duplicating function. That's a little different.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    6. Re:EULA by Thalia · · Score: 1

      The EC (and the U.S.) permit reverse engineering to access the non-protected portions of the data. In other words, merely having permission to reverse engineer does NOT give you permission to copy any code, or infringe any copyrights or trademarks. I expect that HackersQuest is still in trouble.

      Thalia

    7. Re:EULA by umask077 · · Score: 1

      > 6. We may terminate this Agreement (including your Software license and your Account) immediately and without notice i So if they ban you they terminate the agreement and all parts within are null and void. You can then write server emulators.

      --
      --- Always remember. 99.36% of all statistics are inaccurate.
  13. Why is everyone so negative? by Smitty825 · · Score: 1

    Why are you all being so negative about what Verant is going to do? Everone just assumes that they will sue the authors of this software! What if they don't and instead spend the money they would have spent on lawyers improving their protocol & game so that it is worth paying for, as opposed to using the presumably free service.

    I agree that recently corporations have been quick to sue, but until they sue, I don't think that we should become negative about a company. Let's give them a chance to react first!

    Dan

    --

    Doh!
    1. Re:Why is everyone so negative? by mike260 · · Score: 1
      I agree that recently corporations have been quick to sue, but until they sue, I don't think that we should become negative about a company. Let's give them a chance to react first!

      Umm, I don't want to sound too facist or anything but wouldn't Verant suing be quite an understandable reaction? I mean, if (eg) Steven Spielberg made a movie set in the Star Wars universe, wouldn't George Lucas be within his rights to sue?

      What if they don't and instead spend the money they would have spent on lawyers improving their protocol & game so that it is worth paying for, as opposed to using the presumably free service

      Why should they have to compete with someone who's standing on their shoulders?

    2. Re:Why is everyone so negative? by nyet · · Score: 2

      Because its always cheaper and more profitable to sue than to compete.

  14. Smacked down hard... by sugarman · · Score: 1
    Well Verant and EQ are under the vast umbrella of Sony, and they're not involved in lawsuits invoking other emulators or the DMCA, are they?

    IMHO, this is going to get litigated hard and fast. How effective that will be remains to be seen. Verant has been unwilling or unable to go after other indiviudals, such as the E-Bay Farmers, or Uber You planes-raid people. (for those not in the know, Uber you is a bunch of players who are charging people for the privledge of going on a raid to the one of the various Planes in EQ. There's a little more to it than that, natch, but not much.) Of course, the E-Bay practices haven't actually threatened Verant's cash-flow.

    Now, on a related note, I'd love to see this go to court. Verant has admitted that many of their coders were avid MUDers from back in the day, and a lot of the inspiration for EQ came from one particular MUD Brad used to play (sorry, can't remember the name). Most of the MUD's fall under various froms of an "open License", and EQ itself has a lot of throwbacks to those text-based MUDs. More so than UO or AC appear to have, for instance. I'd be very interested to see the source for some of the code from EQ, and from whence it sprang.

    Just a thought...

    --
    --sugarman--
    1. Re:Smacked down hard... by jidar · · Score: 1

      The MUD that Brad used to play on was called "Sojourn" AKA "Toril"

      Although you seem to be implying that EQ used MUD source. Are you serious? Mud's where you move from 1 room to the next by pressing a direction key compared to a full 3d game where you move around the zone (level) you are in with freedom?

      That's a pretty big stretch.

      --
      Sigs are awesome huh?
    2. Re:Smacked down hard... by Nicolas+MONNET · · Score: 2

      Uber You is a prank. Just a prank. Really. Looks like YHBT. HAND!

    3. Re:Smacked down hard... by jallen02 · · Score: 2

      Definately just a mud, instead of sending back the text description of a room you send back instructions the client would process to render a room or render a scene or whatever.. it in fact... is not that hard. It requires some hacking but I thought it out of course nothing is as easy at it seems and its a good idea to only send minimal data such as maybe where you are in the world and the client has all the "look" of the room stored on his machine so that he is not sent complex rendering instructions over the network which I think would make it to snow. Best to do just like a mud actually, send in a command prompt with vital statistics just text even and EQ client can make it all pretty and graphical, so the server side is IMO much easier to do (in thery) than the client.

      Jeremy

    4. Re:Smacked down hard... by Tenareth · · Score: 1

      Having worked on the code for several MUDs, and other types of games, yes the roll code is the same concept, but hey, that really hasn't changed since D&D came out. To move from a text-based, turn based system to a Graphical quasi-realtime game is not a hack to the code, it's a rewrite from scratch.

      And yes, Verant gladly admits that EQ, during combat is actually turn-based, it's how they are so easy on bandwidth. (Battle is just the result of rolls, which occur on the server side).

      The other thing is that MUDs had no requirement for having sane directions. You could cross-link rooms all over the place, which was common for doing things like mazes and house-of-mirrors.


      -- Keith Moore

      --
      This sig is the express property of someone.
    5. Re:Smacked down hard... by jallen02 · · Score: 1

      Yeah I realize that its not just a simple hack. :) you would have to design from the ground up.

      However the underlying concept of how to handle the game should be the same given that EQ is turn based.. server side at least.

      Given that I have converted several muds to ad@d turn based systems for combat where spells had a casting time and you had to memorize them. I am not much of a graphics programmer (obviously it shows in the way I treat such systems) However I do know enough about the server side to write something of that nature :)

      Jeremy

    6. Re:Smacked down hard... by Steeltoe · · Score: 1

      "Yeah I realize that its not just a simple hack. :)"

      Heh, REALLY? I thought it was just a simple matter of importing old .c files into a Text-MUD OLE Object in Visual Studio. After that it's just a simple matter of drag'n drop the Text-MUD Icon over the neat DirectX7 Icon and voila... Graphical MUD with sound and music! Ta-da!

      Seriously. You could reuse many objects from a Text MUD into a graphical MUD, even using the same driver. However, I would still rewrite things and add more realism simply because a 3D-world is more realistic and complex than Room-based Text MUD. I would be surprised though if Verant actually stole public code to do this, instead of making things up from scratch emulating the older systems. A commercial game like this should be designed from the ground up, not hacked upon old code for "legacy systems".

      - Steeltoe

    7. Re:Smacked down hard... by jallen02 · · Score: 1

      Heh, REALLY? I thought it was just a simple matter of importing old .c files into a Text-MUD OLE Object in Visual Studio. After that it's just a simple matter of drag'n drop the Text-MUD Icon over the neat DirectX7 Icon and voila... Graphical MUD with sound and music! Ta-da! Right thats what MS wants you to believe, then reality strikes... :)

      I imagine you would need some tuned code to deal with several thousand players.

      The main idea is the same.

      Set the "game" into a main loop.

      This loop at varioust ime intervals updates, players, mobs, areas and handles recylcing memory and such as well.

      The loop cleans up your sockets, drops freaky connections etc. It is true you would want to GUT a lot of the internal systems for more realism but I bet a MUD is an excellent base with a little work

      Jeremy

  15. Your Rights Online? by Gregoyle · · Score: 1
    Maybe it's just my browser (and who knows, i'm using IE at work), but this article comes up under "Your Rights Online".

    EthernalQuest is trying to censor me! Help, help, I'm being repressed!

    --

    "He's more machine now than man, twisted and evil."

    1. Re:Your Rights Online? by Patton · · Score: 1

      You ever been to the official EQ boards recently?

      "Your Rights Online" couldn't be a more correct titling for it.

      Basicly what I'm expecting is for Verant to try to squeeze the emulation software out either by court or by technical (changing the formats of all the files etc). Either way it is in a way it censoring.

  16. An excellent idea... by zombieking · · Score: 1

    "Ok, let me get this straight. I buy this game for $40, install it, and then I have to pay an additional thirty bucks a month so I can play it? No thank you..."

    I really don't think that in this era of so called "informational freedom" we should have to pay a monthly fee to play some goofy game online when we are already shelling out $20-$60 (depending on what ISP) for internet access. I mean come on, we already bought the damn game, just let us play it! Screw Everquest, if I want to play a game online, I'll give my money to Blizzard (i.e. Diablo 2). But I do applaud the efforts of these individuals to try to emulate an EQ server.

    --

    -----
    "The only difference between me and a madman is that I'm not mad." - Salvador Dali (1904-1989)
    1. Re:An excellent idea... by jidar · · Score: 1

      $10 a month actually.

      Use the movie ratio to justify it. $7 for 2hours at the movie or $10 for unlimited hours for a month on Everquest. Your average EQ player spends 23 hours a week playing, so for most it's a good value.

      --
      Sigs are awesome huh?
    2. Re:An excellent idea... by eagl · · Score: 1

      You're paying the monthly fee for the organized multiplayer aspects of the game. There are a few online simulations that charge hourly or monthly fees even though the GAME itself is a free download.

      I'll gladly take real human opponents/allies over AI even if it means that I have to pay a subscription fee for access to the servers. AI killing got old several years ago, and most "multiplayer" games only offer up to 8 or so simultaneous players at one time. The pay to play multiplayer services offer (in some cases) over 200 people in one arena at any given time. The gameplay complexity goes waaaaay up when you get past about 30 players.

      Informational freedom has nothing to do with it... The fee is (IMO) a reasonable charge for using the servers that make these "massively multiplayer" games possible. If you don't want to pay, you can always play some single player game by yourself. Also realize that the subscription fees generally pay for R&D towards the next game or version, benefitting the player in the future.

    3. Re:An excellent idea... by zombieking · · Score: 2

      Ok 10 bucks a month, I stand corrected. But, my point still stands. I don't think I should have to buy a game and then pay a monthly fee just to play the damn thing. How about give us the game free and then charge a monthly fee. Then I might consider it.

      --

      -----
      "The only difference between me and a madman is that I'm not mad." - Salvador Dali (1904-1989)
    4. Re:An excellent idea... by rupe · · Score: 1

      Hmmm. Actually, you don't have to. You are free to wait until such a game comes out .....

    5. Re:An excellent idea... by Rational · · Score: 1

      Then fucking *don't*? What's the problem? Is EverQuest somehow impinging on your rights just by existing?

      Hell, I've been paying the monthly fee, without playing, for the last six months -until I move back to a place were I can keep a computer better than a crappy laptop going- just to keep my characters alive.

      I've gotten more entertainment for my ten bucks a month on Everquest than out of *any* movie I've seen in the last year, and just about 80 percent of the books I've read. I'd call that excellent value.

      --
      "Be nice, veer left, and never stop thinking" Iain Banks - Walking On Glass
  17. Re:graphics by jidar · · Score: 1

    Are you stupid?
    When EQ came out it looked better than any other FPRPG (First Person RPG) out there, and rivaled many of the FPS. Christ, did you play Daggerfall?

    --
    Sigs are awesome huh?
  18. Perhaps no lawsuit by jidar · · Score: 1

    One thing a lot of you may not realize is that Hackersquest is in China. This makes litigation a lot more of a problem, I wonder if Verant could even get the logs from the ISP to see who is actually doing this.

    --
    Sigs are awesome huh?
    1. Re:Perhaps no lawsuit by brightloudnoise · · Score: 1

      actually .ch is switzerland, but europe has its own laws protecting folk who reverse-engineer under the auspices of interoperablity.

      --
      brightloudnoise.com
    2. Re:Perhaps no lawsuit by MoZ-RedShirt · · Score: 1

      > Hackersquest is in China

      I'm not quite sure where you got your info but the TLD "ch" stands for Switzerland.
      China's TLD is "cn".

      You might want to check out
      ftp://ftp.ripe.net/iso3166-countrycodes .txt

      RedShirt
      --

      --
      Microsft spel chekar vor sail, worgs grate !!!
  19. Post it EVERYWHERE by Spackler · · Score: 1

    Anyone with access to changing a web site, get this thing onto it.
    I just changed my company's web site (with authorization of the president of the company) to be the DeCSS source code.

    http://www.superiorlabs.com

    If the MPAA needs help finding us, there is a link to e-mail us on the site.
    If enough sites do this, the absurdity will be shown, and the point will be made!

    TAG - This time, you really are IT!

  20. Lawsuit? Under which laws? by Nicolas+MONNET · · Score: 3

    I might be wrong, but it seems that the HackersQuest guys are actually european. If that's the case, good luck suing them ... since you should know that the European Union explicitly allows reverse engineering for interoperability purposes ... which is precisely what this emulator is about. And not only do they allow it, but they also are very likely to sue a company who would try to prevent it for anticompetitive behavior.

    It's also interesting to notice that to play Everquest, you have to buy the package AND pay a monthly fee ... this might fall under forced bundling rules if they don't allow people to buy the product without paying the subscription....

    1. Re:Lawsuit? Under which laws? by Golias · · Score: 3
      It's also interesting to notice that to play Everquest, you have to buy the package AND pay a monthly fee ... this might fall under forced bundling rules if they don't allow people to buy the product without paying the subscription....

      When I bought my Qualcomm phone, I did not get a free subscription to Sprint's digital network.

      Same principle applies here. The software client is a product (from Sony), the Variant subscription is a service that lets you use that product.

      (By the way, if the FCC allowed a bunch of Linux hippies to host a free phone network that worked with my Qualcomm phone, Sprint could not sue them and Qualcomm would not want to.)

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    2. Re:Lawsuit? Under which laws? by Nicolas+MONNET · · Score: 2

      I'm talking about European law, btw.

    3. Re:Lawsuit? Under which laws? by Dirtside · · Score: 2

      You can buy EverQuest in the store and you get a one-month free trial before you have to pay a subscription to keep playing. I don't think that's illegal. If so, please cite the particular law that makes it so, and describe why Verant's actions fall under it.

      --
      "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
    4. Re:Lawsuit? Under which laws? by Golias · · Score: 3
      True, but were you forced to use only Sprint's digital network

      Yes. Sprint's digital network is proprietary, so my phone is no good for AT&T service. This is not a problem for me, because I got a better deal than AT&T offers. (I bought the phone that matched the service I wanted, not vice versa).

      There is no question that more people would play EQ if either the service or the software was free, but sales and subscriptions of EQ completely blew away their wildest expectations. Why ask for less money when you have so many customers willing to pay more?

      My point remains the same, they are selling you two things, a product (the software) and a service (the hosting), and feel they have the right to charge for each.

      If you don't like their pricing scheme, you have the right to spend your money elsewhere, and/or participate in the WorldForge project, which may lead to a free EQ-like game.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    5. Re:Lawsuit? Under which laws? by Golias · · Score: 2
      If you own a land-line phone, you are charge for the phone service.

      If you are in England, and you buy a TV, and then have to pay the "rates" to use it.

      If you buy lights, you still need to pay for electricity to use them.

      Starting to see a pattern here? It does not matter where you are from, a lot of things are split into "purchace cost" and "maintainence cost". EQ is just one more example.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    6. Re:Lawsuit? Under which laws? by Eso · · Score: 1

      They give you one month free, which is plenty, believe me.

    7. Re:Lawsuit? Under which laws? by Bertog · · Score: 1

      Your phone company is not going to sue you if you switch providers. Neither are your electric or cable companies. The analogies you make are a bit off the mark... Bertog

    8. Re:Lawsuit? Under which laws? by elegant7x · · Score: 2

      If you buy lights, you still need to pay for electricity to use them.

      Should the eletrical company be able to sue someone for giving away free solar cells and batteries?

      Sure, the servers need to be paid for somehow, but why shouldn't someone else be able to provide an alternative service?

      Amber Yuan 2k A.D

      --

      "and dear god does this website suck now." -- CmdrTaco
    9. Re:Lawsuit? Under which laws? by Golias · · Score: 1
      Sony has not sued anybody yet either.

      I wasn't talking about the likelyhood of legal action. If you care to follow the thread, it was a discussion of whether Sony has the right to charge for both the game and the service. My point is that they do... and you have the right to buy neither if you don't like it.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    10. Re:Lawsuit? Under which laws? by Golias · · Score: 1
      Should the eletrical company be able to sue someone for giving away free solar cells and batteries?

      No.

      ...and Sony has not sued anybody for trying to use other servers for EQ. Why not get hysterical about stupid lawsuits that are happening, instead of ones that might happen?

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    11. Re:Lawsuit? Under which laws? by elegant7x · · Score: 1

      I'm not, I'm only trying to refute a post someone else made, in another thread. obviously, untill Sony/variant does something, we can't bash them.

      Amber Yuan 2k A.D

      --

      "and dear god does this website suck now." -- CmdrTaco
    12. Re:Lawsuit? Under which laws? by JesseL · · Score: 1

      If you buy a telephone you can use it with your own telephone network , millions of offices do.

      If you buy a TV you can use it with your VCR or closed circuit camera.

      If you buy lights you are welcome to run your own generator and even sell electricity back to the electric company.

      --
      "Prefiero morir de pie que vivir siempre arrodillado!"
    13. Re:Lawsuit? Under which laws? by Nicolas+MONNET · · Score: 2

      Under French law (and I believe, EU law as well), it is illegal to artifically tie 2 separate products for sale, because it's detrimental to competition. You just can't say: you can only buy product B if you buy product A. Of course, you can give discounts in that case, but I guess it has to remain within reason.

      It can be easily argued that the software package you buy in a shop, and the network service provided by Verant/Sony are two separate products. Hell, they are billed separately, sold separately, and the person who buys A (the box) might not be the same as the one who buys B (the network service).

    14. Re:Lawsuit? Under which laws? by umask077 · · Score: 1
      If you own a land-line phone, you are charge for the phone service. If you are in England, and you buy a TV, and then have to pay the "rates" to use it. If you buy lights, you still need to pay for electricity to use them. Starting to see a pattern here? It does not matter where you are from, a lot of things are split into "purchace cost" and "maintainence cost". EQ is just one more example. I can return the phone, I can return the Tv, I can return the lights if I dont agree with anything I consider barbaric about there fair use like having to pay for electricity. I can modify the phone, the tv, or lights, Say I bought it in england and took it to the US id have to change the plugs and voltage.

      Now adays you cant return software. There are a few places where you can but the vast majority of them will not except open software returns. If I bought everquest at best buy, took it home, and decided i didnt like the EULA and tried to take it back they would say "You opened it, we cant accept it". Now the caveat for me is I live in virginia and anything bought via credit can be returned within 48 hours for any reason so yeah I use my credit card and get the manager down and threaten call my lawyer on the phone and they accept it as long as its within 2 days but I learned about doing that the hard way and if my lawyer wasnt my friend he would charge me for the service. EULA's not posted on the outside of the box are invalid by default. I bought the product without agreeing to an eula, If it said something on the box i didnt agree with I wouldnt have bought it. Since I cant return it its mine. I can do anything I want to with it. My agreement is between best buy and myself. Not with sony or verant or anyone else. I agreed to follow the rules on the outside of the box, Pay best buy for the product and eventually leave the store with it and the 10 other things I bought i didnt really need. Until companies accept EULA based returns EULA's are completely invalid and If some software company sues me over them I will be happy to sue best buy over failing to inform me of the details on the outside of the box. Its that simple, Fair trade includes the ability to return, ecspecially when you cant find out the rules until you already cant return it. So if sony wants to call best buy and tell them to go ahead and accept everquest returns I'll be happy to follow there EULA, there only other option is a page on the outside of the box. Other then that its invalid.

      --
      --- Always remember. 99.36% of all statistics are inaccurate.
  21. Wrong by Nicolas+MONNET · · Score: 2

    Sony did'nt make the game. Verant made the game, and got bought by Sony.

  22. Its generally worth paying $10/month by haystor · · Score: 2
    Having played many games online, and made the choice between pay servers, and free servers, I prefer to pay $10/month. The most important thing this buys me is moderation. There are real people running the game that will give the boot to the 12 year old that spams the place non-stop. It may not get rid of every imbecile, but it does go a long way.

    --
    t
  23. It might be better... by molog · · Score: 3
    I say this because Verant doesn't know anything about game balance. Pretty much everyone who plays EQ knows that a necromancer can wipe out a party of adventurers their own level, and can solo dragons. Other classes aren't really good at anything. For example wizards, who are supposed to be the masters of directed damage, consistently miss all the time, ok an exaggeration, with their spells.

    Also because people were leveling too fast Verant made a stupid decision to put hell levels in, basically they are levels that take 2x the xp to get to the next level as the game would normally have you do when the better solution would have been to have the experience curve increase over all the levels instead of just 30, 35, 40, 45, etc.

    There are problems and other bugs, like enemies attacking you through a stonewall, that Verant doesn't admit is a bug. Maybe if some REAL role-players ran things there would be more fun then sitting and waiting for an enemy to spawn so you can get one step closer to maxing your level which is all there is to do besides chatting with people. Really, chatting and killing the infrequent enemy is all it is. So it might not be the same experiance but I feel it couldn't be too much worse.
    Molog

    So Linus, what are we doing tonight?

    --
    So Linus, what are we going to do tonight?
    The same thing we do every night Tux. Try to take over the world!
    1. Re:It might be better... by DrTomorrow · · Score: 1
      Wrong, wrong, wrong.

      Necromancers can't solo dragons or anything close. Necros used to take advantage of certain areas where they could charm an undead to do their fighting while they feigned death. This has been fixed. Necros still are powerful, but not anything like you stated.

      Verant didn't choose to put in Hell Levels. Some of the parameters in the Exp-needed formula get changed every five levels to require more experience at higher levels. As a side effect, this caused a big jump in the needed experience for the hell levels. Yes, it should have been a continuous curve, but the hell levels were not done on purpose.

      Enemies attacking through a stonewall is not a bug. This is a design choice made by Verant. Early in the beta, monsters couldn't attack thru walls, but players were exploiting this by shooting thru windows and such. Instead of designing a proper pathing alog, Verant just let the monsters walk thru walls.

      A bug is when a program doesn't work as it intended to work. The designers/programmers have explicitly chosen to allow monsters to walk thru walls. Call it a bad design choice, but not a bug.

      --

      Everything in this post is false.

    2. Re:It might be better... by molog · · Score: 3
      A bug is when a program doesn't work as it intended to work. The designers/programmers have explicitly chosen to allow monsters to walk thru walls. Call it a bad design choice, but not a bug.

      I didn't know about that choice, I'm sorry for my ignorance. It was a very bad design choice, and the players shooting through windows makes since if enemies can do it too. Ok, so necros have been brought back down to earth since I left, which I suppose is good. The Hell levels are the result of bad design then. There is no reason for an Exp formula to behave like this at all.

      Doesn't change the fact that the GM events suck and that the only thing to do is max you levels while chatting to people. I will never look back to trying to get into a group just so I could waist hours at a time waiting for stuff to spawn every 10 minutes or so just to gain a very small fraction of experience points. I believe the current average to get to level 50 now is 80 days (1,920 hours) play time. I wonder what percentage of that is waiting for an enemy to spawn? I would say probably, from my own experience, around 80%.

      I suppose one could argue that this is similar to many other RPGs out there where you mindlessly fight stuff to raise levels but at least in those there was an achievable goal besides just becoming the most powerful being. There was an enemy to fight, a kingdom to restore or something along those lines that made this a means to an end. There is nothing for the players to strive for, except to be more powerful then everyone else and that gets too old too soon.
      Molog

      So Linus, what are we doing tonight?

      --
      So Linus, what are we going to do tonight?
      The same thing we do every night Tux. Try to take over the world!
    3. Re:It might be better... by CubeDweller · · Score: 1

      I fully agree with your point. EQ's game balance is terrible. Granted balancing a game like this is a fairly challenging task, but Verant's efforts have been falling well short of the mark.

      That said, I thought I'd comment that being attacked through walls has a reasonable explanation, and I don't fault Verant for this bug/feature.

      The reason you can be attacked through walls is that EQ has server-side collision detection turned off. That means to all the monsters and NPCs that live on the servers, doors, walls, rocks and trees don't exist. They walk around a flat, empty plane with all the other PCs and NPCs. Verant did this to save CPU cycles. Running an EQ server that can support thousands of players already requires world-class hardware, so they need to save every cpu cycle they can.

      That's quite a big sacrifice to make. It really hurts the illusion of reality when NPCs can see and walk right through walls. It was a sacrifice that had to be made though, because server-side collision detection is so hard on the CPU. In each zone there might be hundreds of PCs and NPCs, plus hundreds more bits of landscape like walls and trees. If each of these objects has to test whether or not they might be touching every other object in the zone, you can very quickly end up with tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of collision tests every second for each zone in the game. That amount of work makes CPUs throw up their hands and start crying. If they had left the collision detection on, an EQ server might only be able to support half or a quarter as many players as they currently support. It was an unfortunate, unavoidable sacrifice.

      The only reason that you can't walk through those same walls and trees is that player collision detection is done on each individual EQ client. If somebody ever wrote a custom EQ client that ignored collision detection, you'd be able to walk through walls and locked doors too.

      I quit playing EQ about three months ago for some of the reasons you've stated, but I don't fault Verant for this decision. I'd expect that they'll have to make the same sacrifice in their next game too, unless they come up with an amazing algorithm for checking all those objects.

    4. Re:It might be better... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Dude, I know nothing about this game, but your little blurb here has certainly turned me off it for good. Though it may seem like a valid design decision to save CPU cycles, that's still a lame-ass solution. They've sacrificed reality in this so-called simulation for the sake of getting as many players (read: subscribers paying fees) as possible. Sounds like they aren't too concerned about quality, just quantity.

    5. Re:It might be better... by umask077 · · Score: 1
      I disagree that it wasnt a bug. What you have is defined verticese on a surface. So you know where the wall begins and they seem to check this. But they seem to be treating monster objects as 2d or as all the same size which would speed up the code. Humanoid monsters dont hit you through walls. Lions and bears do. They are longer. When they hit the external vertex of the wall they stop but because they are either checked like a human or treated as 2d there body sticks through the wall and they can hit you. I think they did it for the tradeoff in speed. if you have to caculate all 3d vertices on an object you increase the ammount of processor time required to do it. This has an end result of increasing the minumum system requirements of the game. I think and dont quote me they shot to support p200's when the game released, That machine doesnt support async threads, Its significantly slower then say a pentium 3 which is able to handle 5 instructions at a time. When you release a game you have to give some leway to slower machines or you decrease your market. Yes ive been studying game programming for a few weeks and while im not an expert Im coming along nicely so I have a new found appreciation for this.

      --
      --- Always remember. 99.36% of all statistics are inaccurate.
  24. Re:Why I pick on Slashdot Cruiser by geekoid · · Score: 1

    Sounds like KROQ

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  25. Illegal by Fervent · · Score: 4
    They're going to get blown out of the water. Everquest is a fully-copyrighted world where the majority of user data exists on the servers. What are they going to do, mirror a copyrighted hard drive? Even in emulation you're overstepping the boundaries of what's allowed (most emulation projects only get off the ground if the product hasn't been out for years and is no longer profitable, like MAME).

    Besides, they're underhanding Sony and Verant's entire profit system. (Also, note to poster, the graphics in EQ have nothing to do with the server. They're rendered entirely in the client, with only very vague instructions to general placement of things. An emulated server won't improve graphics.)

    --

    - I don't care if they globalize against free speech. All my best free thoughts are done in my head.

    1. Re:Illegal by Alternity · · Score: 3

      Sphere (formerly called TUS formerly called greyworld), Ultima Online Experiment (UOEX) and a bunch of others have done a great job of surviving until now, I don't see why Everquests emulators would not bee able to.

      --


      "If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear"
    2. Re:Illegal by Robert+Link · · Score: 5
      This is kind of a bizarre point of view. Let me see if I've got this straight. I sell you a piece of software which you can then use to connect to my server (for which I charge you a fee) and do some stuff. Then, someone else comes along and writes (using entirely his own code) a work-alike server and says, "Hey, you could use your program with our server instead; we think it's better than the original anyway." Now, how can this be a copyright infringement when in fact nobody has copied anything? Or, to put it another way, how can Verant claim a copyright on code they never wrote, or on data of someone else's devising?


      You also say:


      Even in emulation you're overstepping the boundaries of what's allowed (most emulation projects only get off the ground if the product hasn't been out for years and is no longer profitable, like MAME).

      This seems like a dubious statement as well. As I understand it the legal issues surrounding emulators stem not from distributing the emulators per se, but from distributing the ROMs that go with them. The ROMs are definitely copyrighted, and making copies of them is definitely an infringement. The emulator is just a piece of software, and its copyright belongs to whomever wrote it, not to whomever wrote the thing that it is emulating. In fact, MAME is an interesting analogy because, as I understand it, it is perfectly legal to use MAME with a video game ROM that you have acquired legitimately. In other words, the owner of the copyright on the ROM cannot force you to run the programs contained therein only on hardware of their choosing; you are allowed to run it anyplace you can get it to run. Why should contemporary software be any different in that respect?


      Oh, wait, I know. It's in the license agreement, right? You can't use the client with any server emulator. What a load of bunk. Since when does copyright give you the right to say how a person who has legally purchased a copy of something is allowed to use that copy? Copyright gives you the sole right to distribute copies and give public performances, and that's it. What the customer does with his copy is his business.


      Finally, you observe:


      Besides, they're underhanding Sony and Verant's entire profit system.

      Just so. The problem with the old saw about "giving away the razors and selling the blades" is that you always run the risk that someone will come along with a compatible blade and undersell you. That's capitalism; you put your product on the shelves, and you take your chances. EQ has had a good run already, and there's no reason why they can't continue to do so, provided that they have a continuing commitment to improving their service; after all, they have a huge head start on any upstart emulators. If, however, they try to sit back and soak their captive audience, they will be surpassed by the new competition, and they will lose. That's as it should be.


      -rpl

    3. Re:Illegal by Zummi · · Score: 1

      I never made any comments on the graphics. It must of been Hemos

    4. Re:Illegal by Griffone · · Score: 1

      Somebody should tell the RIAA and MPAA that...

      :)

      Neil................

      --
      I used to have a cool sig.
    5. Re:Illegal by WNight · · Score: 2

      Any after-the-fact agreement like that is void, it's extortion. They sell you a product which they claim will do certain things, then they say it'll only do that if you follow a bunch of rules they didn't mention before you paid...

      And there's NOTHING illegal about taking advantage of someone else's work in such a way. Is Michelin breaking the law in making tires for Ford trucks?

      The software you buy can be used for anything you desire, with the exception of certain copyright restrictions. Microsoft can't tell you that you can't run certain types of programs on their OS, or that you must run it on certain hardware only, etc.

      Neither does any program provider have any legal leg to stand on when they declare you can't use an emulated server instead of theirs. Selling the emulated service is perfectly legal.

      Network protocols aren't 'creative works' and can't be copyrighted.

    6. Re:Illegal by WNight · · Score: 2

      Extortion is simple when I demand payment for you to allow you to do something you're legally entitled to do.

      If I demand $100 or I'll beat you senseless, that's extortion. If I demand you buy a 'Sidewalk License' or I'll kill your dog, that's extortion. If I sell you a product and then after you pay, offer to sell you the unmentioned activation key for another payment, that's extortion...

      Tires aren't server emulators, but the analogy is a good one quite valid in this case.

      Michelin tires don't work exclusively with Ford trucks, but if Ford made a truck that took a new type of tire, I'm sure Michelin would make tires for it, if they thought it would sell, regardless of other companies making a similar car. That means those tires would work exclusively with Ford trucks, and it's irrelevant.

      And by your standards, Michelin tires DO encourage the theft of Ford trucks. If Ford was the sole maker of tires, you could bet they'd be a LOT more expensive than they are now. The fact that Michelin (and other companies) make tires drives down the total cost of ownership for a truck, and especially the maintenance cost. Now it's cheaper for someone to steal a truck, the maintenance cost is more reasonable...

      But that's all irrelevant. Making a product that works with someone else's service is completely legal. Writing contract that after-sale forbid that and tying continues product support to that contract, is illegal.

      Server emulators are *completely* legal. Contracts which forbid them are a best void, at worst, attempts at fraud...

    7. Re:Illegal by Justin0407 · · Score: 1

      You said:

      You can't use the client with any server emulator. What a load of bunk. Since when does copyright give you the right to say how a person who has legally purchased a copy of something is allowed to use that copy? Copyright gives you the sole right to distribute copies and give public performances, and that's it. What the customer does with his copy is his business.

      Tell that to the MPAA. DeCSS anyone?

      --
      justin
    8. Re:Illegal by Panaflex · · Score: 1

      I agree.. you deserve a point or two for that.

      Pan

      --
      I said no... but I missed and it came out yes.
  26. Re:Down with Blizzard! by RedDirt · · Score: 1

    Copy protected? I'm using a copy of the cd as my primary cd so I don't have to worry about hosing it when carrying it around with me ...

    --
    James
  27. Even if that was true... by TheDullBlade · · Score: 2

    You'd still be violating the license, and you'd still be hurting Sony because you'd be undermining a deal they would have been paid for.

    --------

    --
    /.
    1. Re:Even if that was true... by Sloppy · · Score: 2

      you'd still be hurting Sony because you'd be undermining a deal they would have been paid for

      Well, that's just the nature of competition. Competitors "undermine" each other's sales every day. If someone wants to run a service that competes with the one that Sony offers, there's not much that Sony can do about it unless they buy some new legislation.

      You'd still be violating the license

      Ask yourself what contractual consideration you received for agreeing to that license. If you didn't get anything, then it's not a contract -- it's just words on a page. Remember: you already owned the game before you ever saw the license, so your right to play the game was never at stake. And if the game refuses to install or play before you click on "I agree" then it is defective software. Modifying the software to let you get around the "I agree" or spoofing/tricking it by pretending to agree (clicking on "I agree") without really agreeing, is certainly within your rights.


      ---
      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    2. Re:Even if that was true... by Paradise_Pete · · Score: 1
      "If it weren't for you, I'd be making more money" is not, by istelf, sufficient grounds for a lawsuit.

      -Pete

  28. Nope... try again by annarchy · · Score: 1

    Its Verant...not veriant or variant and they did write they game...Verant has been bought by Sony.

    1. Re:Nope... try again by Golias · · Score: 1
      Sorry about the spelling error... I see I'm not the only one who called it that here, though.

      I was under the impression that Sony did not own Verant at the time that EQ came out, though. When did they buy it?

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    2. Re:Nope... try again by cwebster · · Score: 1

      IIRC, Verant Interactive was founded by a bunch of guys who left Sony Online Entertainment to pursue the development of an idea they had. They say they have a 200+ document of the history of Norrath and a lot of other documents, and a lot of time (a couple years) put into just thinking the game out, then they put together a company, named it Verant Interactive, and when they had thier product, EQ, they gor bought up by Sony, the company the original guys were from in the first place. I forget the site i read this at, but ifi can dig it up, i'll throw a link up here.

  29. Won't matter at all... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If you play on the emulator you will notice they are a loonng way from actually making it playable. Right now you can only be one race/class out of a few dozen possibilites. There is no npcs (computer control good guys) or even anything to fight. If it was fully opertaional there isn't much point in playing on a server with even a few dozen people (which the server probably won't be able to handle anyway). There's a reason why EQ is $10.00 (many actually) and a large portion of that goes to the backend, computers, high speed lines, etc. How could this emulator be good then? How about using it with a kick ass mod. Imagine turning EQ into Springfield and being your favortie Simpsons characters, etc. :) I don't think the emu will really be for the people, but rather its a challenge for the developers. Lastly the graphics in EQ are supperior to any game of its class at the moment and the game has been out for over a year and I'm still impressed with em. Apparently whomever wrote the initial post to Slashdot has never played EQ (which is supperior in graphics to Asheron's Call which even came out after EQ).

  30. Re:I paid $30 for Quake3. by don_carnage · · Score: 1
    Did you pay for the skins and mods? Would you play Quake3 if you had to pay for it each time you logged on to a server?

    Just stimulating conversation -- I wouldn't still be playing Tribes if I had to pay for it.

    --

  31. Re:I paid $30 for Quake3. by PrimalChrome · · Score: 1
    Those individual Tribes servers don't require a few million in hardware, connectivity, coders, and customer service reps every month either.

    Primalchrome

  32. Re:Annotated and augmented by AFCArchvile · · Score: 1
    I think everyone can see the parallel here:

    1. Slashdot used to be like that cool radio station. (yup.)

    2. They got bought by a big multi-website media company. (andover.net) 3. They've gotten lame. (rampant linux gnomes bashing every pro-Microsoft post/story) 4. Now, they're giving away a car. (that fugly P/T cruiser) Besides that, the car is fscking fugly. I mean REAL fugly. I mean oh-my-lord-aren't-you-embarrassed-to-be-seen-in-th at-thing fugly. I agree. If it was the Prowler, maybe I'd be interested, but not this attempt to revive Dick Tracy again.
    --
    "Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world." --U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards, speaking to the FCC's lawyer
  33. Re:I paid $30 for Quake3. by don_carnage · · Score: 1
    Yep -- In the end, someone has to foot the bill. Be it the customer buying the software or the high-speed link, or the company running the servers.

    I still hold, though, that the software should be free if the service is going to cost so much monthly.

    --

  34. Intellectual Property... by Patoski · · Score: 3

    First of all I'd like to qualify these comments with the statement that I'm part of the WorldForge community so my opinions are probably worth what you paid for them...

    In concept something like this is a wonderful thing however reading the FAQ fills me with trepidation. Let me elaborate...

    In order to run the emulator you have to own the game so the emulator can rip all the artwork and music out of the game. I'm sorry but this is just plain illegal and unethical. The /. crowd runs around foaming at the mouth for any perceived, slight derivation from the GPL but not a whimper about anyone else's property rights. This is just plain ridiculous. You cannot use someone else's artwork, music what have you without the author's consent. The developers claim that the emulator is legal because "it's 100% reverse engineered" is just plain wrong minded and and illegal really. If they used their own music, artwork I would be cheering them on and even looking into cooperation between our two projects but this just is just disturbing..

    How do you expect anyone to respect the (rights of the) GPL or the FSF when you trample on everyone else's rights?

    -Jason

    --
    G. Washington on Government "it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."
    1. Re:Intellectual Property... by piku · · Score: 1

      "How do you expect anyone to respect the (rights of the) GPL or the FSF when you trample on everyone else's rights?"

      For the same reason your post has a score of zero.

      Its easy. Their selective in their bias.

    2. Re:Intellectual Property... by richie123 · · Score: 1

      Umm, you see, in order to have a copyright violation you have to COPY SOMETHING. If I own a legit copy of the game, then I own a perfectly good licence to all the materials in it, and I may use it as I see fit. And no licence agreement can change that. Sure they might have a right to cancel my official EQ service, but then, who really looses out. I hope this sets you straight.

    3. Re:Intellectual Property... by BradleyUffner · · Score: 1

      hmmm... you you have to OWN the game? so that means you bought it? Then you should have the right to do whatever you want with soemthign you bought as long as you don't make money from it, give it away, or welll.. thats it... you already paid for the data and its being used by you without anyone else seeing it. I know companies like Sony, and the MPAA, want to take rights like that away, but you get the idea.

    4. Re:Intellectual Property... by WNight · · Score: 2

      Nothing is ripped from anything, I don't understand what you're saying. You use exactly the same client, displaying the same graphics. Nothing is new except the IP you connect to. And as all the same graphics and everything are used, being part of the client not the server, it doesn't matter.

      And, I'd like to point out that 'ripping' graphics and sounds out of your copy of Everquest is perfectly legal. If there's an image you'd like to use as a background, go for it. Unless you distribute the images, you're not violating their copyright. They might have an EULA that says otherwise, but it's not legally binding in any way and is actually outright illegal in some ways. (To write a warranty like that for a physical product would get the government and consumer protection groups cracking down *so* quickly...)

    5. Re:Intellectual Property... by mr · · Score: 2

      >If I own a legit copy of the game,

      Except they don't let you OWN the game.

      You licence a copy. And that 'licence' changes what your 'rights are'.

      The question becomes: Will the owner of the software come and spank you and take away your birthday if you violate the licence? No....too many of you moles to whack. There is another 'final solution'.

      You seem to have all forgotten this slashdot Sony story. The 'method' they want to apply to MP3's works to stop hackerquest. Yup, go after the ISP's to 'blackhole' the hackerquest systems.

      --
      If it was said on slashdot, it MUST be true!
    6. Re:Intellectual Property... by richie123 · · Score: 1

      My point is still valid, breaking a license is not is not a crime, merely a breach of contract. Violating a copyright is a criminal offense. If I copied the game for others to use, then I would be breaking the law, using the content and graphics in a way other than they intended is still well within my rights.

    7. Re:Intellectual Property... by Mars+Saxman · · Score: 2
      In order to run the emulator you have to own the game so the emulator can rip all the artwork and music out of the game. I'm sorry but this is just plain illegal and unethical.

      Aside from the fact that you're wrong, you're wrong. This is a server emulator, not a client emulator, so there's no "ripping" of anything out of anything else. You play with your same old client. Even if this were a client emulator, loading graphics from your original CD would be both legal and ethical. There's no difference in pulling bits off the CD with a resource editor and pulling bits off the CD with a clone of the game. In neither situation are you using the software the graphics creator intended to be used to view the graphics, but in neither situation are you making unauthorized copies of the data. Courts have held for years that loading data from disk into temporary memory does not constitute copying.

      -Mars

    8. Re:Intellectual Property... by eclectro · · Score: 1

      So, to end, the GPL is a unenforcable farce, because breaking a license is not illigal?

      Overly restrictive EULA's that take away free speech and fair use rights are in reality the unenforcable farces. Unfortunately companies like Sony and the MPAA have access to the best lawyers that sex/money/crack can buy to enforce their farces.

      All the bought off judges and politicians are only too happy to oblidge in the effort.

      So the golden rule that applies here is "whoever has all the gold makes the rules".

      Another statement that might apply is "If you outlaw fair use, only outlaws will be able to use fairly".

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    9. Re:Intellectual Property... by richie123 · · Score: 1

      It is not illegal as in "you are going to jail", it is a breach of contract, meaning they can revoke your privileges granted to you under the license. They cannot sue you, they cannot have you arrested, and they cannot come to your house looking for the CD. The Rules of fair use do apply, and nothing they put in a license can change that. All they can do is cancel your account, and ban you from their service, that's ALL.

  35. Everquest graphics/Paying by Tenareth · · Score: 3

    Yes, Everquest graphics are a bit behind, but this is Massive Multiplayer game, they perhaps don't want to limit themselves to a small group? Kunark uses higher end graphics, guess what, most people still play on the original Island becuase, since it uses older style graphics, it runs much faster on lower end machines.

    EverQuest is fun. It isn't the best graphics, but it has a lot of people, it's good graphics, and it runs smooth on a 24000 baud connection. (I have 2 machines running EQ behind 48000 baud connections with no lag). Most people don't realize why certain games takeoff, I think people are angry that EQ is popular even though, in their very tiny minds, it has everything wrong with it. Dated graphics, per month charges, etc.

    It's FUN, and Verant constantly adjusts play balance. It's as simple as that. EQ is a graphical LPMud, and to that end, they are still #1, and untouched.

    To do a game like EQ, you can't do the best graphics, because you are going to cut out a chunk of society that doesn't have the latest wiz-bang hardware, and for a TRUE massive multiplayer game (not Unreal/Doom style Multiplayer) the more people you get, with a wider range of personalities, the better.

    I don't play EQ just for the graphics, I play because there are constantly people from all over the world that I have actually gotten to know over time, just like the original MUD/MUSH/MUCK servers.

    When I have a problem with the game, I have a GM assist me, or I can work with them on bugs. I have to pay per-month, but I also haven't purchased another $50 game in the past 15 months. I used to buy a game every two weeks, beat it, buy another. EQ has many levels of fun, and I doubt it's going anywhere soon. To get a server up and running, and keep it running costs money. If you spend 6 months building a character, I would find it a bit annoying to find that Oh, sorry, I didn't feel like supporting this server anymore, so I disconnected it, good luck, which is bound to happen with free servers. This is a persistent world, not a short one. It's not the same as Doom/Unreal, etc. Look at MUD/MUSH/MUCKs, and how many come and go.


    -- Keith Moore

    --
    This sig is the express property of someone.
    1. Re:Everquest graphics/Paying by s.gill · · Score: 1

      24000 baud? 48000 baud!?! I think you mean bps... big difference! SG

    2. Re:Everquest graphics/Paying by Steeltoe · · Score: 1

      "This is a persistent world, not a short one. It's not the same as Doom/Unreal, etc. Look at MUD/MUSH/MUCKs, and how many come and go."

      It's NOT a persistent world, except for the saving of player-data. There are few dynamics of the game, except spawning of NPCs and their deaths. The quests are boring, too unintuitive, hard and buggy. Give the wrong item to the wrong NPC, or combine stuff in the wrong order, and you have to redo it all. Getting good gear mounts down to camping the same NPC for hours, sometimes for weeks. I say Everquest is good at what it is (3D-Hack'n Slash MUD), but it's NOT a persistent RPG world. Far from it. It gets boring and repetitive after level 20-25ish.

      Yes, I do know it's harder to make a 3D-MUD. I've been involved in MUD-programming myself (both on driver-side and game logics), so I know it all pretty well. I've just lost faith that a company can deliver what I, and many others, would want. I have greater hopes for WorldForge or something similar.

      My grudges against Verant, Sony and Everquest have nothing to do with Everquest being popular. If people like their game, more power to them. However, they should call and review their game for what it is. Enough with the glamorous white-papers.

      When Anarchy Online comes out, Everquest will get some serious competition on this field.. I wouldn't hold my breath though, no point in waiting for a prospective future when you only live in the Now.

      - Steeltoe

  36. Diversity is bad by gnalle · · Score: 1

    A couple of weeks ago we had a discussion why all opensource games were clones of existing games. The simple answer is that all game programmers have to start more or less from scratch. They spend their time trying to get the game working instead of thinking of great plots. The programmers of this server have probably done a good job, but we really an engine that can be used to create a lot of different games. Therefore it seems to me that worldforge is one of the the most promising open source massive multiplayer projects on the market right now.

  37. The MMORPG to end all MMORPGs by Threed · · Score: 2

    Ok, UO sucked. EverQuest has issues. The ONE person I know who plays Asheron's Call is about to give up. What's a gamer to do?

    Join WorldForge! www.worldforge.org

    With an Open Source player in the MMORPG niche there will be some real competition in the area of game-play. Don't like the rules? Change 'em! Want your own world? Download a server. Computer's too slow to handle the 3D client? It works with a 2D client as well as a text client.

    The real Threed's /. ID is lower than the real Bruce Perens'.

    --Threed

    1. Re:The MMORPG to end all MMORPGs by Kimiko · · Score: 1

      I sure hope WorldForge game servers are faster than their web page, or they're not going to get very far.

    2. Re:The MMORPG to end all MMORPGs by Thomas+Charron · · Score: 2

      Unfortionatly, I'd say that, in it's current state, it's practically unusable as a 'production' level game platform. The graphics are there, and damned nice, but it takes alot more then the engine to make a MMORPG.

      --
      -- I'm the root of all that's evil, but you can call me cookie..
  38. Great, so much for my EverQuest Broadway play.. by neo · · Score: 2

    From the EULA: (my emphasis)

    "7. Subject to the terms of this Agreement, we hereby grant to you a non-exclusive license to use the Software solely in connection with playing the Game via an authorized and fully-paid Account. You may not copy (except to make one necessary back-up copy), distribute, rent, lease, loan, modify or create derivative works, adapt, translate, perform, display, sublicense or transfer the Software..."

    I was hoping to get ABBA to write the songs too..

    1. Re:Great, so much for my EverQuest Broadway play.. by DrEldarion · · Score: 2

      Well, that gets them out of fiascos like this.

      -- Dr. Eldarion --

  39. Re:graphics by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    First person? Isn't Evercrack third person, and if so, how does comparing it to first person games?

    Frankly, I think X-Com and other games of that ilk are more visually appealing than EQ. This is probably because of the artists and/or art style involved with that game. X-Com is from the days of the 486SX.

    Just because it's better than its competitors doesn't mean it doesn't suck.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  40. something i just don't get by himagus · · Score: 1

    okay, so someone who's bought the eq software wants to connect to a free server. the writing and running of a different eq server is not against any law that i know of.
    how does the current eq client that the user has know to connect to the non-verant server instead of the ones off in cali? i'm assuming one of two things need to happen:
    a) an eqclient.exe wrapper is going to be created so that the server connections can be rerouted
    b) a couple of hexs are changed in eqclient.exe before runtime to enable a change of login server addy.
    in the first case, no harm is done, and all seems cheery and happy. altering the eqclient.exe file, on the other hand, is a direct breach of contract, and the purchaser of eq can be terminated from further service. from what the hackersquest page has said in the faq, seems as if it might just be up to the user to change how they connect, thus not making the programmers liable for anything.

    1. Re:something i just don't get by Steeltoe · · Score: 1

      As far as I know, the login servers are not hardcoded into the .exe file. That would be most stupid. You can probably start the game with a parameter that makes you able to type-in your login server. I've seen such a page when a friend of mine had problems with a dll-patch.

      - Steeltoe

  41. To clear up some confusion.. by AuSerpent · · Score: 1

    Verant made the game. Sony bought Verant and made Everquest (and other Verant games to come) part of Sony Station. The same login/password I use to log into Everquest I can use to log into Sony Station on the web.

    Since IANAL, I don't know whether they can get away with the emulated server. It certainly seems like a cool idea to "play" around with and see and do parts of the game that you haven't been able to accomplish before.

    BUT, Verant/Sony provides more than just a server for you to connect. They provide GM's to help with bug/problems that arise (albeit slow sometimes). They provide a full development team to update/expand the game. Basically they have a whole lot of people that are paid to admin the game. Any public servers will be lacking here.

    I'm also curious on how they will emulate quests/items/etc. that have yet to be discovered or only discovered by a few.

    Although it will be very likely that I "play" around with the emulator Sony/Verant will still get my $9.99 a month.

  42. Hmmm.... anyone else tried it? by rudethorn · · Score: 3

    All of the previous posts that I have read dealt with moral ramifications, possible action on Sony and Verant's part, and the quality of EQ's graphics.

    I play EQ regularly and can safely say that while I don't enjoy paying around $10 a month, plus $40 for the game alone, It's something that I've come to terms with; they don't call it EverCrack for nothing. It would be nice sometimes, to try something a little different, ie, different NPC's, different item's, and locations.

    Curious, as most /.er's usually are by nature, I decided to try out the Hacker's Quest server. Hacker's quest has already gained notoriety for an app that they created called ShowEQ, which sniffs the packets and logs them allowing you to find out specifics of the game that Verant doesn't want you to know. It's pretty nifty, although it does kind of cheapen the experience, IMHO.

    Once, I logged on to the Hackersquest server (affectionatly titled) Nine Inch Gnomes ^_^, I made up a new character, as one would expect to do when joining a new server. Once I actually got into the game, I noticed that everyone else started as the same race and level, in the same area.... it's a beta ok... I can cope.

    I looked around some more to find that there were no NPC's, enemies, spells, or anything vaguly resembling gameplay.... underwhelming again. What did redeem this server is that they added some extra commands, that allow you to take the form of any NPC in the game; to spawn any item in the game. This was pretty nifty, I could take the form of giant hands or spectres, or try out the most expensive equipment in the game.

    Verdict: Hacker's Quest has a long way to go... without any gameplay, well it is boring as Bill Gates' wardrobe color scheme. It does have a little novelty value, but a game without anything to do is not worth noticing.

    Sidenote: Sony/Verant will take legal action, it's just their style. ^_^

    bitpusher

    --
    Wanted: A Bauhaus reformation of society.
  43. Freedom to imitate by DanielNiklasWood · · Score: 1

    The guy who invented tetris was a genius. The thousands of people who coded up clones know how to program C.

    Why not produce something original?

    Sony et al made a game that lots of people enjoy and lots of people feel is worth the money.

    The right way to step up to the plate (whether a free software developer or a commercial developer) is to have a creative, novel idea of your own and implement it.

    It's so much easier to just copy someone else idea (I realize the work required to implement, but still) that I don't see this as the ideal that open source advocates should be striving for.

    This sort of "the same but free" bullshit is all too common.

  44. Re:graphics by DrSkwid · · Score: 1

    you just don't know
    try a decent computer
    you should play it in 3d like i do
    try that on a 386
    .oO0Oo.

    --
    There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
  45. Server bandwidth by JWhiton · · Score: 1
    I really doubt they'll ever give Verant a run for its money. Why? Bandwidth!

    The servers on EQ have to have phone lines that can handle something like several gigs a second to run EQ, and even then lag can become a problem if a certain area gets too crowded (i.e. large events, where your client has to keep track of the location of 50 or more people). I imagine each server is made up of at least several computers, keeping track of players in different areas. These are all probably connected with some humongous LAN configuration.

    All in all, I don't think a small group of hackers in Europe (as is my understanding, I could be wrong) could match the awesome power that Verant needs to run the game at its current pace.

  46. That is ludicrous. by elegant7x · · Score: 2

    Look, running these servers are going to cause Variant to loose money, it?s a simple as that. So? Who ever said that Variant had a god given right to make money the way they planned? They might be pissed, but if they are, they have no legal leg to stand on (no-reverse engineering clauses are not legally binding in any way). So what? Should we ban anything that might cause someone to loose money? Why?

    Civil Disobedience is breaking the law for a higher purpose, breaking unjust laws. And the whole point is to get caught. What your describing is, well it isn't anything. We are free to do whatever we want, and if it causes a company with a bad business model to go out of business, then, that?s just to bad.

    Amber Yuan 2k A.D

    --

    "and dear god does this website suck now." -- CmdrTaco
  47. Don't you see? by elegant7x · · Score: 2

    They are stealing eyeballs, they are stealing users!. And all of us know that users are property. Everything belongs to the intermediary corporations that distribute stuff, duh.

    Amber Yuan 2k A.D

    --

    "and dear god does this website suck now." -- CmdrTaco
  48. Welcome to the offical EQ boards... by cwebster · · Score: 1

    This kind of crap is exactly why i dont read the Offical EQ boards, its all just a bunch of "My class sucks" and "verant sucks" posts.

  49. 1992 graphics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Heh, what a thoughtless comment. First of all, this is a _server_ emulator which uses the standard EverQuest client, models graphics, zones, sounds, etc. It will look and sound the same. Duh. Secondly, Everquest has very nice Graphics, all things considered -- models need to be low poly because you often have 15-30 models in view, sometimes in large outdoor areas. Textures can't be high res because a large number of global textures need to be loaded in memory at all times (all types of player armor, pets, illusions, some monsters) along with diverse per zone monster and world textures. You simply can't compare a game like this to Q3 or UT -- or UO2, a next generation game.

  50. Re:Why I pick on Slashdot Cruiser by elegant7x · · Score: 2

    They got bought by a big multi-website media company.

    Not to nit-pick here, but andover wasn't really a 'big media company', they were small time when slashdot got baught. Slashdot probably accounted for 80% of their webhits or something.

    Of course, andover got purchaced by a huge computer company.... but anyway

    Why does slashdot suck now? beacuse its gotten big, and the comments have gotten lame, most of the people who post on this thing are morons now, it sucks.

    Amber Yuan 2k A.D

    --

    "and dear god does this website suck now." -- CmdrTaco
  51. It depends on the free server. by Glawen · · Score: 1

    Sure, some free servers will allow everyone to run rampant; on the other hand, I'd prefer a dedicated GM who _chooses_ who's allowed to play on his server, over the apathetic Verant GM being paid $8 a hour.

    Sometimes the best things in life are free...

  52. Assuming you accept the "license agreement" by Snaller · · Score: 1
    I don't :)

    Not that i play that awfull game, but i but i generally don't accept that kind of "agreement" and agreement is something where i sign on the dotted line.

    --

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  53. Assuming you accept the EULA by Snaller · · Score: 1
    I don't - I haven't made any agreement with them. Nor would i arge have 99.99999999999999% of their users, it's just some crap you have to get past to play what they have payed for. Only a silly court would uphold that.

    By reading this message you agree that you owe me 1 million dollars, and that you will deliver them to me where and when i choose.

    --

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  54. Re:Your (negative) karma recipe for today by Enoch+Root · · Score: 2

    *sigh* Do you even know how to read? What part of my message was even remotely unclear? Is it hard to type with paws?

  55. Build new worlds.. by Snaller · · Score: 1
    They're going to get blown out of the water. Everquest is a fully-copyrighted world where the majority of user data exists on the servers. What are they going to do, mirror a copyrighted hard drive?

    The only thing thats on servers are essentially savegames. Who cares about that. What they can do, what they should do is build NEW worlds. Start by letting fans creating new cities, islands, continents.. perhaps one has a spaceport and people can fly to other planets - ooh, the creative mind boggles :)

    --

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    1. Re:Build new worlds.. by Fervent · · Score: 2
      Now I agree with this point. If the servers have new worlds different than the first, that would be legitimate.

      But if they're copying things verbatim... no.

      --

      - I don't care if they globalize against free speech. All my best free thoughts are done in my head.

  56. Re: sure they do by SEAL · · Score: 1

    Well, perhaps in this case, "encourage" is a better word than "facilitate".

    Without emulators, people don't warez EQ. Why? Because each CD that is sold has a key, and only one instance of each key is allowed on the Verant servers. Additionally, Verant knows who you are if you play on their servers (since you are paying them). So warezing doesn't make sense.

    With an EQ emulator to play on, it becomes much more attractive to make a copy of a friend's CD, rather than paying for your own.

  57. Re:Umm no by DarkLordV7 · · Score: 1

    And MUDs copied Adventure and added another level: multiplayer. Verant took MUDs, and added another level: 3D graphics. This means adding a lot -- compensation for distance, speed, height, and a LOT of other things 3D graphics introduce. EverQuest isn't just a MUD with 3D graphics. If that's all you think, then you're severely opinionated.

  58. Pay for Play by dolo666 · · Score: 1
    I find it very unsettling to think of Pay for Play (PFP) as an advance to PC gaming.

    I originally bought EQ, and took it back when I realized it was PFP. Yeah, I'm a dummy... but I'm not the only dummy to be duped into the cycle. At least I got out in time!

    PFP games make 60$ (CAN) per copy, and on top of that, 20 bucks a month for server fees. How much of the server fees goes to profit, and how much is really used to improve the game?

    When it's in the can, the game is done. Sure they add models and contests and stuff via PFP server downloads, but you are never really getting a refined game. The game tends to become congested, not better.

    The online community loves EQ. I hear nothing but rave reviews of EQ. Asheron's Call also has a good following. These games are immersive, fun and very cool, indeed. PFP is not a method to improve gameplay; PFP is a cash grab.

    With the current free Quake 3 servers available, it's about time that immersive online games followed suit.

    Instead of paying for servers, now I can put some cash toward better hardware. :)

    Damn fools... if I'm playing on a free server, do I really care if you smoke my EQ account?

    /d

  59. How about fair use? by Steeltoe · · Score: 1

    You pay for the box more than you have to pay for other games. It buys you one month of play. I'd say ripping graphics and sounds for PERSONAL USE would fall under the category FAIR USE. Just as with music CDs and videos. I think that's why Verant charges so much for the boxes in the first place.

    The EULA shouldn't be legally binding. They have changed it over and over again, and if you disagree, suddenly you have paid for nothing? That's blackmailing, not agreement.

    What is "wrong", is distributing the game CD to people not owning the game. However, I said "wrong", because nothing is absolute in this world.

    - Steeltoe

  60. Better graphics? by kfsone · · Score: 1

    The "Server Emulator" (although that's a poor choice of name) doesn't change the front end. Remember; this is a bunch of guys who are too lazy to write their own MMRPOG and are instead simply re-using the EQ engine and protocols for some bizzare reason.

    And to anyone who is about to step in to say 'You don't know how much work that would involve!', well, actually yes I do, and I point out that Verant have already done that.

    --
    -- A change is as good as a reboot.
  61. Better Graphics? by kfsone · · Score: 1

    They are spoofing the server, not the client. IMHO these guys should stop at this point, gather together a development team of like-minded people, and write their own client and server and protocol.

    And all of that aside... They have agreed to the following:

    16. This Agreement is governed in all respects by the laws of the State of California as such laws are applied to agreements entered into and to be performed entirely within California between California residents. The UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods is expressly disclaimed. Both parties submit to personal jurisdiction in California and further agree that any cause of action relating to this Agreement shall be brought in a court in San Mateo County, California. If any provision of this Agreement is held to be invalid or unenforceable, such provision shall be struck and the remaining provisions shall be enforced. Our failure to act with respect to a breach by you or others does not waive our right to act with respect to subsequent or similar breaches. You may not assign or transfer this Agreement or your rights hereunder, and any attempt to the contrary is void. This Agreement sets forth the entire understanding and agreement between us and you with respect to the subject matter hereof. Except as provided above, this Agreement may not be amended except in a writing signed by both parties.

    Oliver

    --
    -- A change is as good as a reboot.
  62. I've got an idea! by Valar · · Score: 1

    Hmm...well perhaps we ought to base it on DikuMUD like the original everquest servers :P
    http://www.dikumud.com/diku/everquest.asp
    of course now that there is a settlement both side deny anything happened at all

  63. Re:huh? by tmatysik · · Score: 1
    "lets see you render a 3d forest full of trees in quake1 or 2, and then let 200 ppl run around in it"

    I've never played EQ, but from the screenshots I've seen it looks like the trees are mostly sprites... this allows for far greater performance as you don't have to render a complex 3d shape anymore, rather just draw a bitmap on the screen to show the tree.

    This technique should also be possible in Quake, although it may require a minor modification to the code. And Quake1 is open-sourced now, isn't it?

  64. Let's settle this... by cthulhubob · · Score: 1

    Nethack has better graphics (and I'm not talking about X11 tile-mode either).

    I greatly prefer seeing an '@' and envisioning my elven ranger standing at the entrance to the Dungeons of Doom, then walking into a cavern and seeing sky through the far wall because the clipping plane is halfway through the tunnel.

    --

    In post-9/11 America, the CIA interrogates YOU!