Slashdot Mirror


Rockstar Ships Max Payne 2 Cracked By Pirates

Jamie noticed a fairly amazing little story about Rockstar shipping a version of Max Payne 2 via Steam that was actually cracked by pirates to remove the DRM. The going theory was that it was easier for them to simply use the pirate group's crack than to actually remove their DRM themselves.

7 of 340 comments (clear)

  1. Hypocrisy by sopssa · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So Rockstar needed crackers help to release an old game in a digital download version? Maybe now it makes companies think that games without DRM are superior to DRM-laden versions, if even they need cracked versions to re-release the games whose developers are already gone.

    On top of that they're using someones elses work and profiting from it.

    Someone at kotaku's comments also noticed they're using cracked executables for the original Max Payne.

  2. An Easier Route by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "Pirates sue Rockstar for using and distributing unlicensed cracks."

    There's another way you can sue them. Abondonware rights were added to the DMCA that made it legal to crack games that are "no longer being sold or supported" for your own personal purposes of archival. Now, it's still illegal to distribute those cracked games. So the people who cracked it might have a claim that they cracked these games for their own archival purpose after Max Payne left stores and did not distribute them. But the great part is that you don't need to sue them, you can write that up in a letter notifying the ESA who will take them to court and, effectively, may sue the copyright holders for distributing a cracked game even though they own the copyright on it. After all, it just might fit the description of abandonware and set precedent one way or the other.

    I hope the crackers seriously stick it to them. Copyright length, game DRM and licensing really don't make any sense to me. Honestly I really am upset that I paid for ~$40 for Contra on the NES back in 1990 only to have to pay $8 for it on the Wii today with no ability to transfer it from that device to another. How many more times must I pay for the Contra license to what is the exact same game?

    --
    My work here is dung.
  3. more obvious explanation by SEAL · · Score: 5, Interesting

    One of the Rockstar coders was a member of Myth.

    (you think I joke, but crack / warez teams are often loaded with industry insiders...)

    1. Re:more obvious explanation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      One of the Rockstar coders was a member of Myth.

      That was my very first thought. It's entirely possible that the original crack was someone from Rockstar who compiled a version of the executable without the DRM crap included. Throw in a Myth header and job done. 10 years later when it comes time to release it on Steam, they just pull up the no-DRM version (possibly not even realizing that it's labeled as Myth's) and send it off for release.

  4. Waste not, want not.... by aapold · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Back when Babylon 5 was still being produced, some licensing issue had held up making any models of the ships being produced as toys, which prompted some outfits to start making their own models and selling them illegally.

    JMS even mentioned one of these being shut down, but being impressed by the quality of these models, apparently made with nothing more to go on than screen caps.

    In an episode soon afterwards one of the characters on the show was shown using a very detailed model of one of their ships... when questioned whether these two events were related, JMS' only response was "waste not, want not..."

    --
    "Waste not one watt!" - CZ
  5. Re:Same story different players by k8to · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Not exactly.

    The original DRM was removed, since steam is a central DRM provider, and having two DRM systems would be extremely undesirable.

    It is a kind of snapshot of the waste that is DRM, but that's not really any different from any sort of licensing being non-productive overhead. It's a cost of doing business.

    --
    -josh
  6. Re:But...? by denmarkw00t · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Did anyone state that no QA had been done? I would assume (read: HOPE) that Rockstar had the brains to test the hell out of this binary before saying "Well, let's just release it and see what happens..." Granted, probably as much maybe a little more work than patching it themselves, but it would behoove them not to check the code or at least monitor the data paths of the executable before blindly putting it to market. Maybe they even worked WITH the cracking group to gain the source-code so they could ensure there was nothing malicious(er) going on.