Slashdot Mirror


EQ Emulator Winter's Roar Shut Down

grumpygrodyguy writes "Fans of Everquest emulation were dealt a blow today as Sony Online Entertainment threatened Winter's Roar into shutting down their server. WR was home to approximately 350 players and a labor of love for the developers who spent hours a day for nearly 3 years improving this unique game world. WR was a not-for-profit MMORPG that allowed players to play for free as long as they owned the original Everquest client up to and including the Luclin expansions. SOE has threatened WR's hosting company EV1 with legal action unless it ceases and desists service immediately."

66 comments

  1. Why? by Irashtar · · Score: 1

    What some game companies can't understand is, they make the games, we have fun, they get money. some people have more fun creating than fighting and leveling up.

    1. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      What some game companies can't understand is, they make the games, we have fun, they get money

      That's the point. Everquest is a subscription game. This server emulator allows people to play Everquest without paying money to Sony.

      some people have more fun creating than fighting and leveling up

      If they really want to build bits and pieces of somebody else's MMO world, they should go and play Second Life (which is essentially a sandbox designed to host whatever you create, the have Windows and Mac clients, a Linux client is apparently on the way) - or they should simply roll their own MMO client (and when, in a sad twist of irony they decide to charge people to play it, I shall laugh).

  2. EULA DMCA by FidelCatsro · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I would have loved to see this go to court , unfortunately they most likely could not afford to do this so rather than risk anything they have to simply comply .
    Justice ,for the rich.

    --
    The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
    1. Re:EULA DMCA by falcon5768 · · Score: 1

      they would lose. unless sony doesnt have a line in it which I doubt they dont, the TOS pretty much spells out you will play this game on their servers only. In the least they could probably get you on hacking, but likely they would try to get you on theft of fees since every person on that server is lost SOE revinue.

      --

      "Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."

    2. Re:EULA DMCA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ,

      • Is the parent redundant because it is the first post like this .
      • Or is it redundant because it is an opinion that is not in TFA.
      • Is it redundant because we were all thinking that and every other post says it
      • Or perhaps its redundant because you disagree, bingo

    3. Re:EULA DMCA by FidelCatsro · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That is highly Debatable , the TOS should only apply to the service they provide(The servers ,and use of them) and its questionable as to if the EULA is enforceable (in the UK and Germany it defiantly is not, not sure about the USA though).
      The question of if it is lost revenue is also a problem , It raises two question
      Is it a loss of revenue IE: Would these people have played on the normal servers otherwise.
      Or is it a gain in revenue , Did some of these people buy EQ and the expansions(or gold edition) specifically to play on this server.
      Sony only really loses money if you steal the game from a shop and then hack onto their servers and play for nothing. Otherwise they gain money , just not as much as they would like to gain.

      --
      The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
    4. Re:EULA DMCA by spiff42 · · Score: 1
      Justice ,for the rich.

      Yes, thats the way it works:

      The Golden Rule: Whoever has the gold makes the rules.

    5. Re:EULA DMCA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One thing to note: Winter's Roar required a fully patched client. It's very difficult to get EQ patches without a subscription (although I doubt it's impossible, it may be more trouble than it's worth.) Thus, (for most people) you must have a valid client key for the game, all expansions, and a current subscription to the 'real' EQ. Therefore, Sony lost NOTHING.

    6. Re:EULA DMCA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      • Is this AC post concerned about the moderation system at slashdot?
      • Does this post want to see how many rehtorical questions can be asked without using a question mark?
      • Does he want to use bullet points for no reason?
      • Is the AC post really by the parent? Is his ego sadly tied to his moderation points on slashdot? Bingo.
    7. Re:EULA DMCA by FictionPimp · · Score: 1

      no, you dont need a valid CD key or a subscription to patch the client. I know. All you need is to have a friend to email you the EQ exe. You stick it in a folder, run it, an it will download all your missing content. Boom, your done.

    8. Re:EULA DMCA by Draigon · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I was with HackersQuest when it first began before it splinted off into EQEmu and their behavior towards this sort of community has always been in wide mood swings.

      Here's a few facts tho:
      Sony hired at least one person from the emulator community that many considered to be the best addition to the team ever. The emulated service is not the same as the non-emulated service. A few hundred people (300-400? hah!) is a drop in the bucket. People on emulated servers are fans of the game but not fans of the service. Embracing the community of player auctions (selling in-game items for real world cash) is more damaging to their game, as well as the entire MMOG industry, than anything an emulated service could do (specially since the service was provided free).

      As for the emulation crowd having subscriptions, not necessarily true. I wrote a php script around 2000/01 that retrieved their patch files and let me stay up to date. Out of morbid curiosity, I tested it sometime early last year and it still worked.

      --
      -Rabbit
    9. Re:EULA DMCA by Attaturk · · Score: 1


      Here's a few facts tho:
      Sony hired at least one person from the emulator community that many considered to be the best addition to the team ever. The emulated service is not the same as the non-emulated service. A few hundred people (300-400? hah!) is a drop in the bucket. People on emulated servers are fans of the game but not fans of the service. Embracing the community of player auctions (selling in-game items for real world cash) is more damaging to their game, as well as the entire MMOG industry, than anything an emulated service could do (specially since the service was provided free).


      You were doing fine until you started to throw some opinion into your "facts" paragraph. ;- )

    10. Re:EULA DMCA by asleepathemouse · · Score: 1

      you dont even need to have a friend, you can get the eqlive patcher on sony's website, run it and it wil download and rebuild the game for you beofore it ever asks for a user/password. i just reinstalled myself this way under a week ago, on a high speed line it is in fact teh easier way to do it (takes longer but is unattended ..no disk swaps)

      --
      "tell the ones that come after me that 5 is to much"
    11. Re:EULA DMCA by kathgar1 · · Score: 1

      EQEMu actually spawned from Ags by Agz, not EthernalQuest directly. Also, I know of no one from the emulating community that was hired -- they did hire someone from SEQ though. Also, the TFA is wrong about the number of players. WR peaked at about 380 players /concurrent/, but I do not have a good number of active accounts at the time we shut down. True about not needing to patch, but the majority of emu players are likely to have played live in the past and purchased the game in a box or one of the pay-to-download expansions

  3. Cloners or Creators? by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 4, Interesting
    They've already cloned the servers, why not just clone the clients too, and tell Sony to climb a rope?

    What? Too much like work? Seriously, if the Open Source community wants to shake the "only cloners" label, why not create an Open MMORPG? It should be easy -- if it's architected well, you can just release a basic shell and let it grow. The players will want a good game, so they'll develop content, enhancements, and bug fixes, right? The Players will be the Developers will be the Artists will be the Community. It should be a perfect application for Open Source. And if you toss in a little BitTorrent and a little Seti@home you could do it serverless peer-to-peer.

    --
    If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
    1. Re:Cloners or Creators? by FidelCatsro · · Score: 5, Informative

      like this http://black-legacy.com/index.php
      orhttp://sourceforge.net/projects/planeshift/
      Have a look on sourceforge for a few more

      --
      The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
    2. Re:Cloners or Creators? by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      An open standard from MMORPG clients would be a nice idea. Then we could have a single game that wil work with multiple clients, ports for different platforms will be available for free, and commercial games will be able to save a bit of time through not having to develop their own protocols. Difficulty would be preventing people from cheating though.

    3. Re:Cloners or Creators? by 10101001+10101001 · · Score: 1

      What makes you think that them cloning the client would do anything more than make Sony send another C&D and actually start suing? In the end, that's the only reason Winter's Roar alone has to not tell Sony to "climb a rope". I very much doubt it has anything to do with a worry that Sony will start making their clients incompatible with the WR server.

      Now, if WR made a client and server pair that was incompatible with EQ and "enough" different (I'd take Blizzard's C&D against FreeCraft as a possible standard on what's too close)--ie, didn't compete directly with EQ's business model, then perhaps Sony would relent. But there's no legal basis Sony can claim for trying to force a monopoly over owning the only EQ network any more than Blizzard can over owning the only Battlenet network. Personally, I hope WR steps up and gets the support to legally tell Sony to "climb a rope".

      --
      Eurohacker European paranoia, gun rights, and h
    4. Re:Cloners or Creators? by Jicksta · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Eh,

      I'd say Planeshift is kind of ruled out as getting anywhere, really. When I originally found out about it, I was so caught up in fascination, I installed Windows XP back on my computer just so I could play it (ATI Linux drivers, you know).

      Trust me, I don't say this easily, but Planeshift is going no where. I know, its already so well developed, but in truth, there are so many problems behind the scenes.

      A while back, I emailed the project manager for Planeshift and asked him why he didn't use the SourceForge mirrors for hosting the Planeshift binaries and replied saying, and I quote, "We have a proprietary license on art, and we don't want to use bandwidth of sourceforge for it, as it's intended for open assets." Now, Planeshift relies only on user-donated mirrors which are a joke. If any of them work at all, you'll spend a day downloading the game.

      Actual playing for fun is on their servers is another sad impossibility. Because it's open source, it has tons of hackers who cause the admins to periodically flush the database of player characters. Not to mention, there's absolutely no story or any real depth to the game. It feels like it's more of a "proof of concept."

      Creating a Planeshift character is probably the most frustrating thing a game has ever made me do. In a respectable sign of innovation, the Planeshift developers created tons of different things you can change, but really, as the creation windows say, most of the things don't really work. What you end up doing is reading hundreds of lines of text, understanding everything, then you get an ambiguous error message that says some of your choices conflict *AFTER* you go through the creation system, and end up having to do it all over again. If you're making a Planeshift character, expect to set aside one or two hours, at least.

      Realistically, no one wants Planeshift to be a hit more than I do. I'm an open source programmer with a strong love for MMORPGs. But Planeshift is not the solution we've all been waiting for. A tragedy, truly.

    5. Re:Cloners or Creators? by FidelCatsro · · Score: 1

      One thing the OS community is sadly lacking is designers , and its a major problem .
      We have some of the greatest minds in development , but we are severely short in the art department.
      Now hopefully this will improve as more Apple users embrace OSS as the efforts for computability on OS X keep churning along , but for now were kind of at a major hurdle in this respect( I mention apple here as a great number of layout artists and artists of many flavours favour apple).

      --
      The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
    6. Re:Cloners or Creators? by patio11 · · Score: 1
      MMORPGs are the most resource-intensive game you can possibly pick to develop. Open source gaming has failed to develop strong original concepts even in genres which are easy to develop, like turn based strategy. And I say this as a developer (on a game which is brand spanking new technology-wise, but is an adaptation of a popular board game, but for which we would have no users).

      You know what the most popular open-source game is? Free-civ (Civilization 1/2 clone). Digging into actual original titles, you have Battle of Wesnoth, which is enjoyable but of a level of quality roughly comparable to the bargain bin released-only-in-strategy-heaven-Japan GBA titles (except those bargain bin titles have better plots). Battle of Wesnoth deserves an award for the overall quality of their art resources, major props for managing a consistent and appealing visual style, but they're still nothing to write home about compared to even the (low) prevailing standard in turn-based strategy.

      I don't think we'll ever see an open source MMORPG which is worth the time it takes to download. Focus on the things open source does well (applications with long life cycles), take the savings you get and play WoW on your Windows box.

    7. Re:Cloners or Creators? by Jackdaw+Rookery · · Score: 1

      I don't think designers are lacking in OSS, I think respect for designers is though.

      Design is considered to late in the OSS lifecycle*, if it is considered at all, it is something that needs to change.

      *Gross genralisation, I'll get me coat.

  4. To you, EQ Emulation! by Jicksta · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Everquest emulation is such a stunning achievement in reverse engineering. I used to run an EQEmu server a couple years ago and being a GM on a server was the most empowering feeling I've ever felt in my life. Not many can say they've killed Kerafyrm one-on-one with pure melee and no GM invincibility!

    To this day I owe my sanity to Everquest emulation because it effectively killed my Everquest addiction. Playing as a GM ruined my want to ever want to go back to measly old dictated EQ servers. :)

    More servers will follow. Go to hell SOE. We're going to keep playing.

    1. Re:To you, EQ Emulation! by Elsebet · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why on earth was the parent modded Troll?

      *boggle*

      Anyway, I must agree that playing an emulated version can help quench that Evercrack addiction. I used to play with EQEmu just on my own system with no remote server. It was an hour or two of fun running around in the zones I never got to see due to my level (only ever hit 30 myself). I also summoned myself all the best cleric armor and weapons I could find, just to see what it all looked like. I did the same for a few other classes with epic weapons I felt were pleasing to the eye.

      In that regard, I can see why SoE is so protective of anyone playing on non-official servers. Once a player sees how silly easy it is to type a command and have Ragebringer pop into your hand (as a cleric nonetheless) spending hours on the same effort just loses it luster. Obviously the social aspect is lost on the detached server, and really that is all that keeps me and likely many others firmly attached to the genre.

      --
      Sacré-bleu! Where is me mama?
  5. One option by ghmh · · Score: 2, Interesting

    would be to host the servers somewhere like the Channel Islands, Luxemburg or similar, where Sony won't have much bullying power.

    I guess Sony is missing a small amount of income from people not playing on their servers. IMHO, they're costing themselves a lot more than they'd hope to (re)gain by doing this sort of thing.

    In fact, the win-win situation would probably be to offer some of these people a job working on upcoming Everquest stuff, but somehow I doubt that's gonna happen.

  6. Doesnt anyone at Sony want to MAKE money? by mcmonkey · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Seriously. This won't affect most customers and most won't care, but out of the few that do take note, are they going to be more likely or less likely to buy Sony products in the future?

    And I don't think this fits the old razor/blade example. Sure, MS takes a loss on each x-box, so they don't want you to figure out how to use the hardware without buying games.

    I don't imagine Sony loses money on selling a box and a CD. That's pretty much pure profit. In fact it's better for them. I'm sure the revenue from the monthly fees are great, but then you have to support all those users--servers, developers, support monkeys, etc.

    But then again, Blizzard did the same thing with Bnet, and those folks weren't even paying! You'd think Blizzard would be glad to get them off their servers...

    oh well...

    1. Re:Doesnt anyone at Sony want to MAKE money? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't imagine Sony loses money on selling a box and a CD.

      Actually a pirated copy will work. You don't need a valid CD key.

      Every time a company tries to enforce its IP, people rationalize that it hurts the company. If companies benefit from piracy, they would allow it. The truth is that it hurts thier bottom line. There isn't a huge population of people who "download it to see if they want to buy it later". That market is a figment of the imagination of IP pirates everywhere.

    2. Re:Doesnt anyone at Sony want to MAKE money? by Mortimer82 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually from a financial point of view, I believe there are very good reasons for Blizzard not wanting third party Battle.net servers out there. Blizzard games all have unique cd-keys, and I know a lot of people who buy the game primarily for the valid cd-key in order to able to play online. With third party servers, a valid cd-key is not required. While I cannot be sure how bad the piracy issue actually is, I know that on our local reverse engineered battle.net server, almost all the players are using a pirated version of the game. IMO, the only justifiable reason for a small private battle.net is if you don't like the chance of playing with cheaters, apart from that I think that the official servers are better in every other way.

    3. Re:Doesnt anyone at Sony want to MAKE money? by mcmonkey · · Score: 1
      With third party servers, a valid cd-key is not required.


      Good point.

    4. Re:Doesnt anyone at Sony want to MAKE money? by KillShill · · Score: 1

      "Sure, MS takes a loss on each x-box, so they don't want you to figure out how to use the hardware without buying games."

      and their business model is in what way my concern?

      once they sell you the "box" they cease ownership of it. they can fuck off and die, along with those other 2 assholes in the console business. what fucking right do they have restricting the use of hardware you fucking BUY?

      answer that question, legally and morally, they are in the wrong. and i'm talking about laws that, you know, make sense, not the new age bs laws that seem to be prevalent since the industrial age.

      they can use another mechanism to prevent you from copying games, but i want those processors under my control.

      they still won't do it... because just like the RIAA/MPAA the real power is the power to control. they don't want people using their OWN hardware in a way that the manufacturer doesn't authorize (like they have any fucking authority, legally or morally to do shit like that).

      the laws won't change, i know that. in order to change the law into something just, there would have to be just people in charge of the laws.

      --
      Science : Proprietary , Knowledge : Open Source
    5. Re:Doesnt anyone at Sony want to MAKE money? by KillShill · · Score: 1

      you do realize that no one in their right mind would use their authentic CD key to play on non-blizzard servers?

      then people running those servers would amass a huge number of real cd keys.

      no... they just run a key gen to play on these servers and good that they do.

      now let's recalculate how many real owners just want to play on non-blizz servers...

      --
      Science : Proprietary , Knowledge : Open Source
    6. Re:Doesnt anyone at Sony want to MAKE money? by ShawnDoc · · Score: 1

      The developer of the most popular emulator wanted to integrate the CD key into their servers, however Blizzard refused to cooperate.

    7. Re:Doesnt anyone at Sony want to MAKE money? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't imagine Sony loses money on selling a box and a CD. That's pretty much pure profit.

      A typical MMO costs $10-20m. Rumor has it that Microsoft payed considerably more than that just for the license for Marvel.

      Retail and distribution takes considerably over half the final price you pay in stores.

      So, assuming everything in the producer/developer's favor:

      A $10m title (one of the cheaper ones now) requires $20m in retail sales. $20m/$50=400,000 sales needed.

      To put that in to perspective, maybe three non-Asian MMOs have ever had those numbers - at least consecutively.

      And that's before you get in to things like a game dropping to $20 three months after release in order to try and get subscribers.

      In short, with current models, you can't possibly cover development costs of a current MMO on box sales alone - the money's in maintaining a subscriber base over several years.

      A service that comes along and offers your servers for free, leaving you with just box sales, isn't doing you any favors. Given the economics, if every player just bought your box and then played on a free server, you'd go bankrupt.

      The only games that break this model: Neverwinter Nights and Guild Wars do it by providing a fraction of the depth of content, thus enabling them to cut the single biggest cost that other MMO developers face.

      Personally, I'd prefer WoW, EQ, DAoC and all the rest of them to remain as options for me to choose to pay for (or not and to just play NWN and Guild Wars), rather than have their business models undermined, stop producing, and have the choice forced upon me.

    8. Re:Doesnt anyone at Sony want to MAKE money? by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      That's because giving a random server system that's far beyond your control full access to your highly treasured secret is a bit... dumb. You don't see banks offering random people to connect to their ATM network. Bnetd would be completely unsecured, anyone could take their implementation of the key checker and turn it into a keygen or at least try to randomly guess the keys (while recoding connections to their own server as well, getting a huge list of confirmed CD keys).
      Never mind that Blizzard would practically be endorsing the system by cooperating, making users expect a certain quality from third party servers and blaming Blizzard for not reaching those standards.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    9. Re:Doesnt anyone at Sony want to MAKE money? by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      If you don't want to play along, that's your thing. If selling a complete system at console prices is no longer profitable don't expect them to make more.

      The deal with a console is that the manufacturer basically says "I'll sell you this computer at little or no profit and you don't get full access to it". There are enough PCs on the market, if you don't want to give up control of your system buy a PC.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  7. Merely lawyers trying to justify their existence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Doesn't anyone at Sony want to MAKE money?

    I don't think that this shutdown was instigated by SoE marketting people, since as you point out it's a terrible marketting move.

    Far more likely that it's their legal division that has pushed for it since it justifies their existence and hence their salaries, and marketting simply doesn't want to antagonize them.

    I've seen it happen in a lot of big companies, being freelance -- "Group Legal" is always treated as gods, despite being clueless about the product itself and the marketting issues. As many have pointed out before, if all lawyers everywhere were put to work sweeping the roads, the world would be a far better place.

  8. Client "Back-patchers" to blaim. by BaronSprite · · Score: 4, Informative

    I've been developing with the EQEMu project since the ancension from AGX. So far the only time a c&d has been issued was if a server provided a back patch for users to play on their server.

    A backpatch was essentially the older version of the game's client and dll files which would allow it to run on the emulated server. These files however were copyrighted material, which usually would give SoE basis for a C&D.

    The project was previously C&Ded when it obtained the planes of power expansion early and the files were provided on the sourceforge page, but other then that there have been little to no legal issues.

    This wasn't so much as sony being the evil empire, but the fact that you can pretty much dl the game for free then use the provided files off the emulated server's webpage to patch it to a time where it is compatible with the emulated server, this was the problem.

    The client updates have pretty much been the single largest setbacks to the project (besides internal developer fights).

    1. Re:Client "Back-patchers" to blaim. by KillShill · · Score: 1

      and if you DID buy the games and expansions.. wouldn't you have the right to use those copyrighted files?

      seems like to me, the more they squeeze, the more things slip through their fingers.

      --
      Science : Proprietary , Knowledge : Open Source
    2. Re:Client "Back-patchers" to blaim. by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Redistributing copyrighted material violates copyright, no matter whether the receipent legally obtained the material before. Copyright says only you have the right to copy, someone redistributing your files on the net without your permission is copying without having the right. Never mind that someone without the files could just download it as well and get them without ever paying for the material. If some of the downloaders having paid fo r it elsewhere was a legal basis to make it legal Warez sites would be legal.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
  9. I think Sony has a point. by Domini · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Just creating a new game world is not enough. They spent loads of time and money creating the graphics and protocol, on which these other people are piggy-backing.

    Sure these people must still own the legal copy of the game, but this is subsidised by the fact that by playing the legal game on the real server builds a client base. So this argument is invalid.

    Not only is it illegal, but it does have a (long-term) financial impact on Sony.

    Thus is it wrong with the letter and the spirit of the law.

    1. Re:I think Sony has a point. by oGMo · · Score: 0, Troll
      Just creating a new game world is not enough. They spent loads of time and money creating the graphics and protocol, on which these other people are piggy-backing.

      BS. You pay full retail price for EQ. And expansion packs. And if you want online patches, you need an account, if it's like other MMO's.

      Just creating a new game world is not enough. They spent loads of time and money creating the graphics and protocol, on which these other people are piggy-backing.

      Not only is it illegal, but it does have a (long-term) financial impact on Sony.

      Uh what? As stated above, you already paid them retail, for what's no more than a regular game. If anything is "invalid", it's your line of reasoning. Somehow you jump to "illegal" here. Circular reasoning.

      Thus is it wrong with the letter and the spirit of the law.

      More importantly, "long-term financial impact on Sony" is absolutely irrelevant. It has nothing to do with the law. You seem to subscribe to the erroneous notion that companies have a "right to profit". There is no right to profit. If it affects Sony's bottom line, it's simply called competition. Contrary to large corporate popular opinion, nothing is wrong with the law here, in word or spirit.

      --

      Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage

    2. Re:I think Sony has a point. by Naikrovek · · Score: 2, Funny

      you can download everquest and the first three expansion packs for free now, with a 30 day trial. The software doesn't cripple after 30 days, only your account.

      replace that account with an account on a non-SOE server, and you've obtained the game free, and can now play for free.

      i can see that you're angry. perhaps you should drink a glass of wine and loosen up a bit.

    3. Re:I think Sony has a point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I disagree that it has a finanicl impact on Sony.

      We all paid for Everquest and it's expansions, thus we have the right to enjoy the graphics that come along with it. It's legal for me to sit at my computer and view all the pretty EQ graphics, why is it different that I'm enjoying it inside of WR? If there was a subscription fee for WR, sure that is a different story. But it's free, thus no one is making money that Sony could be.

      I'll use myself for an example. There is absolutly no long-term financial impact on Sony from myself playing on Winter's Roar. I played Everquest for 5 years, and then the game changed and I didn't like it anymore. I started playing on Winter's Roar recently, and really enjoyed it because it felt like the way original EQ was.

      Now that Winter's Roar is gone, I am still not going back to the original Everquest game. So any way you put it, Sony is not impacted.

      People do not play on the emulators because they do not like to pay a monthly fee; they play because it's different.

    4. Re:I think Sony has a point. by KillShill · · Score: 1

      since when is their business model any concern of the customers'?

      once they sell them the shiny plastic discs, all bets are off as to how they use it. they are perfectly within their moral right to use it how they see fit. these idiotic laws are against the letter and spirit of fundamental property laws. as long as they buy a copy, they can play on any server they want. though of course, the companies will fight to the death to prevent people from doing just that.

      now if you'll excuse me, i have to tell the automobile industry to stop infringing the rights of horse and buggy companies and cease production immediately.

      --
      Science : Proprietary , Knowledge : Open Source
    5. Re:I think Sony has a point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because Sony allows anyone to download their content for free does not mean that people who DID buy their products do not have the right to use the product they bought for whatever purposes. That is like saying that people should not be allowed to circumvent DRM systems imposed upon their legally-owned music/software because such circumvention methods can be used for illegal purposes.

      ---

      By the way, is there something wrong with moderation points going on here? The Grandparent was hardly a troll, and honestly the Parent was really much more 'interesting', or possibly 'informative', than 'funny'. Well, whatever.

    6. Re:I think Sony has a point. by mythosaz · · Score: 1

      No, you don't need to buy a copy.

      You can download the patcher from Sony, and it can download the ENTIRE game, including all retail and online expansions. You need no key to play on their emulated servers.

    7. Re:I think Sony has a point. by Domini · · Score: 1

      Even though you are a troll, this got me to think some more, and I can add:

      Yes, they have a right to profit. They also had the right to give the software away for free and without restriction... that would have been cool but stupid. They exercised that right... live with it! Somehow you have the misguided impression that you can infringe on companies rights, but individuals' rights are sacred? That's called hypocrisy.

      Open Source has the same misconceptions... it's not about stealing software... It's about giving it away.

      Besides, you don't need to actually buy the Sony software to play on the pirate site... you only need to download a specific patch. This patch was provided for free since it is covered by a licence.

      The way they choose to distribute their software and how much they ask for it is protected by that licence. They provide what they provide because the users agree to adhere to those rights.

      If people keep on stealing like this, then innovators will have no incentive to create new cool software. Perhaps Sony can weather this one, but it will set a precedent which smaller MMORPG creators will not be able to survive. Most attempts at open source games suck since they did not have the capital to do it properly. This does not mean they must steal the artwork to save money and thus have a product that looks more professional. I'm not saying they should give it up... I'm just saying that perhaps the OSS model for creating games are wrong and should be looked at.

      It is 'illegal' because it is unlawful. Whether it's morally correct, that is debatable... but not now and not here.

  10. World of Warcraft? by antdude · · Score: 1

    I was told there was a server type for World of Warcraft. I forget the name of it. I was surprised Blizzard didn't shut those guys down especially when they don't like bnetd.

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    1. Re:World of Warcraft? by rellix · · Score: 2, Informative

      You're thinking of WoW emulation which was quickly shut down before release. There were lots of servers and there probably still are, but they're a bit harder to find. Blizzard has been a much larger bully than EQ, although many people may think otherwise. Blizzard has gone as far as shutting down sites that link to this sort of stuff. As a side note, emulated servers (for all games) are nothing in comparison to live servers (hosted by the companies). Winter's Roar was an exception, in that it changed many dynamics of the game, but it still wasn't the same. Most emulated servers (for EQ) never go beyond 50 players at any time which sort of defeats the whole point of an MMO.

      --
      rellix
    2. Re:World of Warcraft? by mcbridematt · · Score: 1

      oh yeah, The WoW EMU community is well alive. Blizzard sent C&Ds to some sites, then (shock horror!) nice 'voluntary C&D' letters to others, quite a few caved in, but well...

  11. wrong section by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why isn't this posted under the Your Rights Online section?

    1. Re:wrong section by jasonmicron · · Score: 1

      Because it is about a game, silly.

    2. Re:wrong section by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But it's about our rights online with regards to said game. Original poster was correct, you're not.

    3. Re:wrong section by jasonmicron · · Score: 1

      It is about your rights online in reguard to the EULA agreement with said game's publisher. Thin line, yes?

  12. My 2 cp by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I was a very fond WR player. Sometimes I wonder why over the past 6 or 7 years i haven't quit MMoRPG's in general. Honestly, because of my love for what wiz, and the crew created, I will be there at the unveiling of dawntide. I will aid them in any way I can, simply because that crew, has a passion for what they are doing. Argue all you want about who had the rights, and what not, I remember countless hours I spent stuck in walls on eqlive waiting for GM assistance. I remember glitches, bugged content, and the whole scpeal. All I know is, Sony never paid any attention to us, and they lost their profit the day they stopped focusing on customer service, and fixes. They lost me, and 80% of the WR players on way back then. I personally will never turn to a EQ game again, so long as it's hosted by sony. They've shown no exempilary work with customer service, and this attempt to blame WR for picking up where they left off is simply irresponsible and childish. Regardless of what this company comes up with in the future, I've officially boycotted it, even if it's going to be the cutting edge. Immature kids who deal with things in an immature manner, will not get any respect, glory, and surely not any funding from me.

    Riesen out.

  13. An error in the original post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The original poster is incorrect in stating how popular the server was.

    It was said that the server was "home to approx. 350 people", while in reality the numbers were significantly higher.

    This is evident by the fact that on many nights they were reaching ~400 simultaneous logged on players.

    1000-2000 active players would be closer to the mark.

  14. SOE put to shame by Jestor+Rodo · · Score: 1

    Sony Online Entertainment only claim to fame WAS Everquest but now that WoW has over 2 millions users and EQ 1 and 2 only have about 750k subscribers ( about 20% of them are all staion access Duplicates), SOE most to anything in its power to secure its faling product.

  15. Interested in the facts by Falkenberg · · Score: 1
    Reading through the WR forum, there is some mention that the C&D from SOE was in reference to the website, and not the game. A quote from this thread in the WR forum:
    The only persistant word rolling around is that Sony issued a Cease and Decist order on the Wintersroar.com website because of it's references to Sony products. The original owner of Witnersroar.com, (no longer a part of the staff I assume) must have paniced and told his registrar to drop the website. It takes time to reregister a website, and for all of the DNS information to propagate around the globe. It sounds like there were DNS problems before this happened as well. That's all I know..
    I'll admit to not reading the entire forum, so I could have missed something... Be that as it may, perhaps there's hope for the game, or perhaps this is just the first volley from SOE? Something to look into if you're interested at any rate...
    1. Re:Interested in the facts by jlapier · · Score: 1

      The initial C&D against the website was followed up by a much nastier C&D against the emulating server. (sorry I don't have more detail, but that's the extent of what the server admin said).

  16. Because we are free. Period. by popo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How fucking stupid do you have to be...

    Uh...No. How stupid do *you* have to be to raise your hand and volunteer for a reduced set of civil rights.

    What we are talking about here is Copyright and you apparently don't understand even the basic principles of that right.

    We are free to write anything, make anything, say anything and create anything we want.

    For centuries the act of "creating" consisted of taking existing creations and modifying and improving them.

    The wheel became the pully, the gear and ultimately the printing press. The wall became the crossbeam, the arch, the buttress and the cathedral. We live in a world where creations are in fact synergies of other creations.

    Now the latest set of creators would like to use money, lawmaking, threats, evangelism and prosecution to make you believe that their simple act of "pulling the ladder up behind them" is in fact a moral action.

    It is not.

    --
    ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
  17. If SOE had a clue about customer support by Leuthor · · Score: 1

    If SOE provided any real customer support they would have more customers, not only that but the crap they pump out for expansions is unreal. If you go to the actual boards you see class issues that have been around for a year or longer and with promises that it will be looked into. They hardly ever actually deal with problems but they put out expansions that will cause you to fall ebhind the game if you dont buy them, make you an inferior player because of gear. I played Wintersroar, and it had nothing to do with me leaving EQ, SOE had everything to do with that, maybe if they put out an expansion every year or maybe year and a half instead of trying to anally molest their customers by sticking it to them with expansions every 6 months they would have more people staying. they might blame eqemu's for loss of customers, but I know I for one left SOE and will bever support another one of their endevors of because how poorly they treat their customers. As far as I am concerned SOE can choke on it! Wintersroar was the best mmorpg i have played since sony took over varent with the luclin expansion, eveything was down hill after then.

  18. Re:Because we are free. Period. by AvantLegion · · Score: 1
    Uh...No. How stupid do *you* have to be to raise your hand and volunteer for a reduced set of civil rights.

    Uh, no sir. How stupid do YOU have to be, to....

    uhm... I've got nothing. I just like the pattern.

  19. Re:Because we are free. Period. by The+Evil+Cub · · Score: 1

    I feel kind of ambivielent about this. I mean, I believe Sony has the right to control their intellectual property. The development of the basic engine and graphics that run the game is all theirs. But on the other hand, like any other work of art like a book, or movie, or song (or whatever...obviously 'art' here is a very relative phrase), once the artists puts it out into the public, it's kind of stupid not to expect some members of the auidence to take things from it and run with them. Speculative Fiction writers have been doing this to each other since the down of SF. And it's only made the fields stronger over all. It's very hard to advance if we aren't allowed to stand on the shoulders of the giants around us. This is just another of the far-too-many examples of this kind of thing that are prevelent in the world today. Then again, I've recently been meme-infected by Cory Doctorow, so maybe I'm not an unbiased person any longer...