Crime goes the easy route when avalible. Why spend so much time and money getting ps3 copies up when you can make 20 copies of a 360 verison in the same time as 1 ps3 verison. Even if a 360 game will go for just $10 compared to a $30 ps3 game. Your siting on 20x10 = $200. $30x1 = $30. And like i've said the huge majority of games have also come out on the 360.
1 Million Xbox 360s to be Banned
- Thread starter Acert93
- Start date
Crime goes the easy route when avalible. Why spend so much time and money getting ps3 copies up when you can make 20 copies of a 360 verison in the same time as 1 ps3 verison. Even if a 360 game will go for just $10 compared to a $30 ps3 game. Your siting on 20x10 = $200. $30x1 = $30. And like i've said the huge majority of games have also come out on the 360.
What was the cost of replicating UMDs also? Didnt hold back the PSP from being one of the most widely hacked systems of all time
You didn't need to replicate a umd from day 1 of being able to play pirated psp games.
You also didn't need a giga-rom to play dreamcast games from day 1 of pirating games.
Because people buy PS3s and there's a market for it?
ShadowRunner
Veteran
And so why must you need to replicate BD from day 1 of being able to play pirated PS3 games?
Those sytems were hacked by enthusiasts, not by organised crime syndicates, which is my point.
Another relevant matter is Sony planned for the PS3 to run Linux, so that removed a lot of top notch hackers (good sense of the word) motivation on attacking the PS3.
What motivation is that? Running homebrew? The complete lack of Linux developments is proof to me that 'hackers' weren't interested in PS3 homebrew, so it could never have been a reason to crack the machine. IMO the greatest draw for hackers is actually a 'secure' system for them to break. They like the challenge. And in this case, PS3 has just proven too tough. I don't know to what degree hackers are professionals looking to profit from their hacking, but I expect that to be a minority.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
What was the cost of replicating UMDs also? Didnt hold back the PSP from being one of the most widely hacked systems of all time
The cost of a memory stick. Without that, there would have been no pirating on PSP. This might also be a reason that Sony doesn't allow full installs to the HD. It's another potential avenue to run pirated games...
Regards,
SB
ShadowRunner
Veteran
Sony didnt allow full installs on psp either. Once a system is compromised anything is possible, intended by sony or not.
What has the cost of a memory stick got to do with it?
ShadowRunner
Veteran
Or they just dont bother paying for live anymore. Or they buy one second hand. Or force RROD and get a new one back for free!
specwarGP2
Regular
Because 20x10 = $200 + $30x1 = $30 > 20x10 = $200?
Why don't people just accept that PS3 is uncrackable? There are other systems out there used to secure content that haven't been cracked for much longer than PS3 has been out.
Or force RROD and get a new one back for free!
I got the feeling that for this case MS resend you your console repair but always Ban.
grandmaster
Veteran
The criminal element will simply get their BDs pressed at a "less scrupulous" BD pressing plant where time is not an issue. This is exactly what is happening with DVD - pirate discs virtually identical to the real thing as they are not burned copies, but professionally duplicated discs.
They're not going to kill of an extremely profitable revenue stream simply because the cost might be higher.
The only reason there are no PS3 copies/pirates is because the protection hasn't been defeated.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Per your quote that I replied to...
The point is that there is no need to replicate UMDs to pirate on PSP. As all methods to run pirated software on the PSP support the memory sticks. IE - it's even cheaper to run pirated games on PSP than it is on an X360 since the memory sticks are re-useable.
So cost of replicating UMDs is a non-factor with regards to pirating on PSP. If the memory sticks did not exist on PSP, then pirating would have been orders of magnitude more difficult. Enough to be prohibitive for anyone except bulk duplicators selling pirated copies for a profit.
Regards,
SB
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Well, DVD counterfitters that do actual pressing generally run their own shops with purchased equipment. Butting out licensing, studios, advertising, marketing, accounting, etc. allows for a profit even at those low prices.
That also makes it a bit more prohibitive for an organization to setup their own BluRay duplication line (as opposed to HD-DVD had it won), since the duplication machinery is significantly more expensive than those for DVD duplication.
The majority of the counterfit disks in the Orient are done on your standard DVD burner however.
Regards,
SB
ShadowRunner
Veteran
PS3 has a harddrive. There is no need to replicate BDs to pirate on PS3 in theory.
The point with the PSP i was making was that it was hacked and nobody was making any money from it. Making money isnt the main driver for console hacking in most cases and so the cost of replicating BDs isnt the reason PS3 hasnt been hacked its that it has good security, that is the point i was making.
Besides that replicating BDs isnt that expensive, if PS3 was hacked to play burned BDs there would be plenty of money to be made. Its a silly argument on both levels.
specwarGP2
Regular
Exactly. Also, pirates can't press games because of the ROM-Mark. Only a handful of licensed replicators possess the equipment to insert the ROM-Mark into a BD-ROM and each mark is unique and can be traced back to the replicator. This is why disc based piracy of BD movies is non existent.
So there's even a bigger incentive to cracking PS3 - if pirates can somehow defeat the ROM-Mark, not only can they make money selling PS3 games, they can also make selling pirate BD movies.
Last edited by a moderator:
The only uncrackable security system is one that doesn't do anything. The PS3 has to run code, that code will have bugs, bugs can be exploited.
The only question is cost and time. The idea with console security systems is to make it expensive to crack, so much so that most people won't bother. The PS3 hackers just haven't yet had enough impetus to pay the cost yet. That might change with the slim no longer allowing linux installations.
The folks who make the most money from hacked boxes (the pirates) are rarely the ones with the expertise to do the hack themselves.
bkilian,
Is there a reason why Microsoft isn't addressing the complaint that they have punished consumers who were not pirating games but only added a larger HDD?
Seems like a pretty blatant attempt to hide behind the TOS, paint everyone as a villan well knowing this isn't the case, and to safeguard the "Apple-Tax" MS-only peripherals.
You would think this was good for MS. Not only is MS charging for online gaming access for non-dedicated servers, when consumers up their HDD to buy MS products off of Live MS wins. Even if you argue, "They can re-download content" that costs MS money.
I feel for MS--to a degree. I remember a number of years ago getting into TeamSpeak with my BF clan and we were scrimming another clan where almost every member had a modded Xbox1 and dozens of pirated games. I am firmly against piracy and have been pretty firm on these forums against all those who take it as a relative issue and defend PC piracy.
On the other hand a company like MS can burn through goodwill pretty quickly and gain the impression they are a nickle-and-diming customers once they get them locked into their platform. I know MS will claim, "We only give customers what they have asked for" but this isn't true when you see how customers are asking for stripped features to return (look at Forza 3) or how this trend of extracting $60 at retail and then REQUIRING microtransactions to get the full benefit of the game (NHL and all those games that have DLC on the disc!!)
When MS starts nailing people for buying 3rd party controllers, 3rd party memory cards (cheaper+more space), or upgrading their HDD to either buy more MS content (or install games so your freaking loud system is tolerable) and decide when the 2005 "Customization and Personalization" of the Xbox was restrained ONLY to approved cash cows, well, MS looks chincy.
Then again who in the gaming press with a large reach dare speak such words? So MS is probably safe and need not really address this issue.
Is there a reason why Microsoft isn't addressing the complaint that they have punished consumers who were not pirating games but only added a larger HDD?
Seems like a pretty blatant attempt to hide behind the TOS, paint everyone as a villan well knowing this isn't the case, and to safeguard the "Apple-Tax" MS-only peripherals.
You would think this was good for MS. Not only is MS charging for online gaming access for non-dedicated servers, when consumers up their HDD to buy MS products off of Live MS wins. Even if you argue, "They can re-download content" that costs MS money.
I feel for MS--to a degree. I remember a number of years ago getting into TeamSpeak with my BF clan and we were scrimming another clan where almost every member had a modded Xbox1 and dozens of pirated games. I am firmly against piracy and have been pretty firm on these forums against all those who take it as a relative issue and defend PC piracy.
On the other hand a company like MS can burn through goodwill pretty quickly and gain the impression they are a nickle-and-diming customers once they get them locked into their platform. I know MS will claim, "We only give customers what they have asked for" but this isn't true when you see how customers are asking for stripped features to return (look at Forza 3) or how this trend of extracting $60 at retail and then REQUIRING microtransactions to get the full benefit of the game (NHL and all those games that have DLC on the disc!!)
When MS starts nailing people for buying 3rd party controllers, 3rd party memory cards (cheaper+more space), or upgrading their HDD to either buy more MS content (or install games so your freaking loud system is tolerable) and decide when the 2005 "Customization and Personalization" of the Xbox was restrained ONLY to approved cash cows, well, MS looks chincy.
Then again who in the gaming press with a large reach dare speak such words? So MS is probably safe and need not really address this issue.
specwarGP2
Regular
And sometimes pirates just aren't smart enough to beat the security. Case in point: DirecTV had a huge hacking scene up until 2002. That's when the P4 card was introduced and killed off DTV piracy for good. Almost 8 years later DTV is still uncrackable.
Also, digital cable encryption has never been cracked. After all this time, I'd say those systems are uncrackable. Same goes for PS3.
