I dled this game from a friend who had cable modem access. He burned it to a disc for me, no problems but it wont let me play it fully. So i researched a bit and discovered it had antipiracy software incorporated into its code. Does anybody happen to know of a way to bypass this? Any help is appreciated.
This is not a warez site or a piracy site. There are people here who make a living off of software licensing. When you pirate a game from a small company, you are contributing to creating a difficult market for software to survive. This is not like music where musicians can have side jobs/gigs to support their art. The work of putting a game together is very expensive in both time (10 hr days for a year at least) and money (over $1million), and this is bare minimum. These companies are hurt by piracy. Please just put down the $25 and buy the game. btw: surely you can find another bbs to ask this question, if you tried.
that's cool. btw: nice signature! It's been a long time, can you recall the play that led to your signature.
PIRACY !!! YOU A$$, we work for YEARS to make a product, and then over 50% of the people steal the dam. game. This sickens me. If you want us to keep making games of the highest quality, go out and BUY the game, support the people who make them. Otherwise, you will see a fast dwindling of cool games to play. One day we will be able to stop all this piracy of our work, it is flat out STEALING from us. PATHETIC !!! DaDakota
So DaDakota, just who is providing your cable service nowadays? Have you gone legit? http://bbs.clutchcity.net/php3/showthread.php?s=&threadid=23439&perpage=30&pagenumber=1
um i think it was cuttino's first game for us. We were playin the w****-iors of golden state. Cuttino hit the game winning three and rudy said something along the lines of "kapaya!"
Seems to be a double standard here. No problem descrambling cable....which is the same as stealing....but when it comes to something you do personally...you let the sh#t out to hit the fan. I would say don't preach what you don't practice....no matter how close to home it hits. Surf
So you've decided to steal cable. Myth: Cable piracy is wrong. Fact: Cable companies are big faceless corporations, which makes it okay.
I pay Time Warner for both my cable and the NBA league pass. I wanted to know whether or not Digital Cable boxes were for sale. Not to borrow cable, but to settle a bet. DaDakota
I would endorse buying the game . . . I bought it after playing the demo, and I'm happy with it. However, I CAN see where someone might want to get a full version and try it before actually purchasing it. I'm not saying that this is what Ninja Sauce X wants to do, but it is a potentially legit reason. Even though there is a demo, maybe it wasn't QUITE a sell. Perhaps he'll try the full version, like it a lot, then buy it. I've done that with some software programs -- CloneCD, 3dMark 2000, Passmark Burn-in-Test . . . and if I don't like it, then I don't buy it and don't use it/get rid of it . . . simple as that.
While I agree that the stealing is wrong, I don't see anyone ever being able to develop a full proof method of protecting software from illegal copies. And it would HAVE to be foolproof, because as soon as someone manages to make one illegal copy, then every computer owner in the world can potentially get it.
Thanks Vengeance. I feel that way about music too, example: ninja hears schism on radio. Ninja burns full lateralus cd. Ninja likes lateralus. To support tool, ninja purchases lateralus. Ninja happy, tool happy. Yay!!
Dr of Dunk likes those Wharfdale speakers at the local hi-fi shop. Dr of Dunk knows they sound really good in the store, but has no idea what they'll sound like in his living room. Dr of Dunk "borrows" (tee hee) the speakers from the hi-fi shop without them knowing and with the full intention of buying them if they are indeed really good speakers! Wait... whaddya mean that's illegal?!?! ... here we go again
Alright . . . borrow them . . . but if you want them you must purchase them, and if not, you must return them EXACTLY as they came -- in the cellophane wrapping and all. That's the thing with software versus hardware -- if you test out a piece of software/borrow/pirate it to evaluate it, you are not damaging the item in any way -- if you don't like it, or don't want it, you can delete it. It's not like you took away a sale or anything, or made merchandise unsalable. With a piece of hardware, the minute you remove it from the packaging, its worth decreases by at least 30%, if not half. It's still "salable", but not for the same profit or anything. Heck, there are companies that do let you even borrow hardware to try it out and if you don't like it, you can return it . . . I'm gonna be doing that with some PC hardware soon . . . A better example than speakers would be, say a book . . . there is a chapter for free on the 'net. You read it and like it, but you don't know if you'll like the book, maybe just that chapter was good. So you go to the library, check it out, and read the first half. You like it a lot, and decide it's worth the 12 bucks it costs to buy it . . . so you do. The difference between the two is that the book example is "legal". I understand the point you're making, but the simple fact is that it's entirely possible that someone be driven to purchase a product by trying it in its full capacity, rather than in merely a demonstrative form. A good demo doesn't require this . . . but let's take the CloneCD demo for example, just because I purchased it. The demo is different now than when I bought the product, so you'll have to accept this on my word. It used to be where their product had unlimited life as a demo, but would only burn and rip at 2x . . . okay, I guess that gives me a good idea of what it does, but frankly, it is so damned slow, and sucks so much right now, I have no desire to purchase it . . . I know it will get faster if I buy it, but I don't know if it's any better than what I have in Adaptec. So I get a crack, and have the full version. I use it for a few weeks, test out the features, and see that "yes, I do want it" and so I purchase it. The company lost nothing by this. They got the sale. I'm not defending the act of piracy across the board, but if it is in an evaluation attempt, then I feel that demonizing the user does no good, and merely turns him off to the entire industry . . . heck, that's what music has done -- how many of us like the RIAA . . . no one . . . why? not because they took away napster per say, but because of their vehement, vigilent, gustapo-like strong-arm tactics that only hurt the customer. Hey, how many of you have downloaded MP3s? And did you buy the CD afterwards? Well, some artists only have one song you care for, and you don't want to buy the CD. But what about others? Heck, I didn't know if I liked Ben Harper, but I thought I might -- I downloaded 4 or 5 MP3s, liked it, and now I own several of his CDs. I've done that with Bob Marley, Government Mule, Devon, David Gray, Keb' Mo, Bela Fleck and the Flecktones, and other artists. Conversely, I downloaded some of this one guy (I can't remember his name, but he's supposed to be a really good Mandolin player -- it was a weird name, and I noticed it in Best Buy, so I d/led a song or two) and I didn't like it, so I didn't purchase the CD, and don't keep the MP3s. Don't think that everyone who evaluates something is merely out to steal it. And comparing a physical good to intellectual property is not a valid comparison because of the symantics behind them.
First of all, I'm not demonizing the user. Secondly, it's illegal, no matter how good your intent or how sweet you sugar coat it. Thirdly, I'm growing weary of the same arguments, so someone come up with something new.
Okay . . . illegal versus morally wrong . . . Legality does not legislate morality. It may be illegal, but is it wrong? I don't think so.
