Martin Karne on 18/9/2007 at 09:11
So you people mean that EA doesn't stand for Extreme Assholes after all?
:p
icemann on 18/9/2007 at 12:05
Well in all technicality what this project effectively is, is an emulator, and emulators have been around since at the very least the introduction of the internet despite attempts by various companies MUCH larger than even EA in size (Sony, Nintendo etc) over many years until they eventually gave up.
If the "emulator" so to speak requires the user to have game files which dont come with the program (maps, sound data files etc) then there is jack shit all that EA can do about this. At most they could complain, but in essence no piracy is being commited and nothing illegal either.
Look at it, in that kindof context and theres not a thing EA can do about it. ASLONG as no original game files are being provided with it.
The_Raven on 18/9/2007 at 13:03
Statements like that make CS students, like myself, cry.
EDIT: Utilizing the original art assets gets around the copyright on the art, not the code itself. Yes, code is protected under copyright; it's an authored work. If you're utilizing one of the "bad" methods of reverse engineering, then it's possible that you're violating the copyright. I'm trying to be as general as possible, I don't know exactly how Volca is doing his reverse engineering; I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt. Also, don't interpret this as being against the project, I'm all for it and hope he succeeds; I'm just mentioning things that I've come across in my studies.
Displacer on 18/9/2007 at 13:58
Quote Posted by The_Raven
I don't know exactly how Volca is doing his reverse engineering; I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt.
I'm doing the reverse engineering end, Volca is writing the new code.
As to how I'm doing it, and where I'm at, I'm just using a disassembler and a hex editor. The point I'm at now is I have code in its entirety disassembled, and almost all of the functions labeled. I'm currently going blind on over 90 megs of undocumented 32 bit assembly (derived from compiled C++ code) recreating the data structures and figuring out the algorithms.
The_Raven on 18/9/2007 at 14:06
Sounds like the "right" way to do it. Hope you guys all the best. :thumb:
William Dojinn on 18/9/2007 at 20:26
Yes. Prove all the naysayers wrong. I'm keeping tabs on this as, even discounting anything the average end user can fiddle with...its still an educational experiance.
That and we might have shock2/thief/deus ex naitivly avalible on linux. Wee!
Volca on 19/9/2007 at 06:44
I'm glad to have Displacer on board! He's certainly the first member who lasted more that a few weeks. :thumb:
I only did blind reverse engineering, which I could call "black box" approach. That is, feeding the DromED/ShockED with different situations, and looking what the result looked like. This means that I'm not touching the code/assembly at all, only the data I created using the editor. I was successful with this approach in the past:
(
http://melody.wz.cz/format.txt) http://melody.wz.cz/format.txt
It's more or less complete description of sony CMD phones (J6/J7/J70) ringer format. I also written a very dirty tracker for that format, which worked :)
I'd not be any good at looking at the assembly anyway. I knew some assembly back when DOS was the only operating system available, but that was 16bit code.
William Dojinn on 16/11/2007 at 21:10
Any updates to speak of volca?
Mercurius on 17/11/2007 at 02:25
So...would something like this allow us to have larger than 256x256 textures? Maybe even jpegs? :o
