3DS Piracy Targeted by Two-Prong Firmware Attack

[Tom Phoenix]

This will make any sort of attempts of using a translation patch a serious pain. =/

To be honest, it's not the firmware updates that disturb me as much as the fact that the handheld is tied to such a degree to an online service. DSi-enhanced games were region-locked precisely beacuse of that reason and I fear 3DS games will be region-locked as well as a result of that.

 

[Atmos Duality]

All it would require is patching over, or bypassing these passive update attempts in the firmware. Since I assume pirates will eventually be using some modified form of the firmware, it stands to reason that it's merely a matter of time before these new tactics become a non-issue.

They made the R4. What's to stop these people (whoever they might be) from copying the functional/control firmware and cutting out the rest?

Still, these are interesting concepts.

 

[sheic99]

I'm sorry, but does no one realise that this actually prevents homebrew games as well? Perfectly legal (at least as far as copyright and such goes; I don't know what the 3DS license says about it), often open source developers are hindered just as much as pirates by this. These are people that want to develop games and applications for consoles in their spare time and release to the public for free. So no, this is not a good thing.

If they want to develop applications for the 3DS then they should get a dev-kit from nintendo. I'm fairly sure they have a procedure in place for letting people create games for their consoles. Pretty sure letting people make games to give away for free isn't really nintendos M.O. Just because you throw the term 'Open Source' in there doesn't mean its good/desired.

-----

On topic: I would genuinely be suprised if they find a way to let this thing play pirated games without physically disabling/removing the wifi antenna. Seems with the passive wifi thing it has going is gonna be a ***** for them to get around otherwise.

Because that is always such an easy process [http://kotaku.com/5115258/bob-of-bobs-game-protests-nintendo]

 

[Th37thTrump3t]

How hard could it be to just disable the wireless internet chip in the system?

Probably not that hard.

 

[UltimatheChosen]

Interesting.

I'm completely on Nintendo's side here, as pirates are assholes, but I'm curious about how effective this will actually be... and whether or not involuntary updates will end up being a problem for legitimate users.

Wow, okay. So because you pirate you're an asshole. Okay then. If you watch anime you're a paedophile

There's a huge difference. For one, anime isn't illegal, and it doesn't involve theft.

Please get your metaphors straight next time.

 

[James Raynor]

It won't work.

Crack it -> Hack it to not auto-update

Simple as that.

 

[Asehujiko]

Everybody who is happy with this system is an idiot. This gives nintendon't the power to shut down legitimate older games that they want people to buy sequels of. Pirates will be absolutely unaffected as they can just disable the wireless auto updates and removing the firmware from the games is going to be just as easy as removing the regular copy protection.

 

[DarthFennec]

... ?
So just disable the part of the code that grabs the updates ...
I mean if you're cracking it anyway, what's to stop you from just doing that?

 

[DarthFennec]

Interesting.

I'm completely on Nintendo's side here, as pirates are assholes, but I'm curious about how effective this will actually be... and whether or not involuntary updates will end up being a problem for legitimate users.

Most pirates are really nice folks, actually. You should go meet one sometime. Anywho, the fact that it's illegal doesn't necessarily mean that piracy is a bad thing. Most of them have their priorities in order, and anyway, the recent history (last decade) of the RIAA should be enough to convince anyone that the law is not always the best way to go. Sure, some pirates steal and don't give any thought to the people they hurt by doing it, but those are very few and far between in my experience (for example, there are many fewer of them than there are American government officials that do the same thing). Most pirates do care, and they will pirate a game, beat it, decide they like it, and buy it for the sole reason that they want to support the development team, and I think that's a much better and more honest way to do it.

Well usually DRMs are problems for legitimate users, but this doesn't sound like it would be, unless the updates are too buggy. I don't think this will be any more difficult to crack than anything else before it, but on the other hand, I think the updates will be good for various, non-piracy-related reasons, like other things they want to improve with the system. I guess the only qualm someone would have with it is if you'd rather run an older version of the firmware, but I don't see why you would want to do that, unless, again, the updates were too buggy. Which they won't be, because of course, this is Nintendo ^_^

 

[UltimatheChosen]

Interesting.

I'm completely on Nintendo's side here, as pirates are assholes, but I'm curious about how effective this will actually be... and whether or not involuntary updates will end up being a problem for legitimate users.

Most pirates are really nice folks, actually. You should go meet one sometime. Anywho, the fact that it's illegal doesn't necessarily mean that piracy is a bad thing. Most of them have their priorities in order, and anyway, the recent history (last decade) of the RIAA should be enough to convince anyone that the law is not always the best way to go. Sure, some pirates steal and don't give any thought to the people they hurt by doing it, but those are very few and far between in my experience (for example, there are many fewer of them than there are American government officials that do the same thing). Most pirates do care, and they will pirate a game, beat it, decide they like it, and buy it for the sole reason that they want to support the development team, and I think that's a much better and more honest way to do it.

Well usually DRMs are problems for legitimate users, but this doesn't sound like it would be, unless the updates are too buggy. I don't think this will be any more difficult to crack than anything else before it, but on the other hand, I think the updates will be good for various, non-piracy-related reasons, like other things they want to improve with the system. I guess the only qualm someone would have with it is if you'd rather run an older version of the firmware, but I don't see why you would want to do that, unless, again, the updates were too buggy. Which they won't be, because of course, this is Nintendo ^_^

It's possible to be a decent person in many ways but still be a complete douche when it comes to respecting ownership.

 

[DarthFennec]

It's possible to be a decent person in many ways but still be a complete douche when it comes to respecting ownership.

As I already stated, almost all pirates do respect the intellectual property of developers and other artists, in most cases moreso than non pirates.
You must have misread my post ^_^

 

[Asuka Soryu]

Ha. I don't have Wi-Fi~ Take that Nintendo. Though... I'm not a pirate so... shut up.

 

[UltimatheChosen]

It's possible to be a decent person in many ways but still be a complete douche when it comes to respecting ownership.

As I already stated, almost all pirates do respect the intellectual property of developers and other artists, in most cases moreso than non pirates.
You must have misread my post ^_^

"Moreso than non pirates"? I don't think you understand what intellectual property is.

I respect these people by paying when I want to use something they've created. The fact that some pirates might buy the game later is immaterial... because every single one of the non-pirates HAS to pay if they want the product.

Furthermore, you haven't stated any statistics to back up your argument of "most pirates later buy the game/TV show/whatever".

In fact, from what I've read, the opposite is true. Pirates will illegally download a game, then move on to another once they either finish it or get bored.

 

[DarthFennec]

"Moreso than non pirates"? I don't think you understand what intellectual property is.

I respect these people by paying when I want to use something they've created. The fact that some pirates might buy the game later is immaterial... because every single one of the non-pirates HAS to pay if they want the product.

Furthermore, you haven't stated any statistics to back up your argument of "most pirates later buy the game/TV show/whatever".

In fact, from what I've read, the opposite is true. Pirates will illegally download a game, then move on to another once they either finish it or get bored.

When a non pirate buys a game, they spend their good money on something that may or may not have been worth it. If it was worth it, great. If not, they throw it out or sell it used or let it sit and collect dust. Furthermore, if the game didn't end up being worth it, the buying of it poisons the industry a little more. The main reason most games nowadays are shit is because we buy those shit games, even when they aren't worth the money. I'm ashamed to say that as a legitimate game consumer, I myself am guilty of doing this.

Let's say, for sake of argument, that I am a pirate. When I download a game, I give it a test run. It's no different from renting it or borrowing it from a friend, except the rental store doesn't get money from me. I play it a while, and gauge if the experience was worth it. If not, I delete it and never think about it again. It's not as if I was going to buy it anyway, so no harm done. The devs don't have any less money because of me. If I do deem it a worthy experience, I buy a copy. I buy a few copies to give to my friends as well. I buy a shirt, if there is one. I donate directly to the devs, if I can. And I talk about the game to whoever will listen.

If I were to steal a game and I ended up enjoying it, I feel it would be my moral obligation to give as much financial support as humanly possible to the development team. Part of that means that I become a walking advertisement for it for the next few months, or sometimes the next few years, or even the rest of my life, if the game is good enough. It also includes buying as much shit from them as I can. Because it's not about the stuff that I buy, it's about the fact that the devs earned my support, and so I'll give them as much of it as I can give. I can't speak for all pirates obviously, but the ones I know of have more or less that outlook on the industry. On the other hand, non pirates don't even think about the developers, or who's getting their money, or why. They're just used to spending money on shit, no matter what it is. I think developers get more respect from pirates than from the non pirates, in that case.

I wasn't aware that you wanted any statistics. After all, nobody's given me any viable statistics in favor of your point of view. People just seem to take for granted the idea that whenever the game industry loses any control to its fans, it also loses a big hunk of money somehow. And people stand by that religiously, and make up these bullshit numbers off the top of their heads, in order to ... I don't know, prove a point I guess? Maybe.

 

[UltimatheChosen]

*snip*

When a non pirate buys a game, they spend their good money on something that may or may not have been worth it. If it was worth it, great. If not, they throw it out or sell it used or let it sit and collect dust. Furthermore, if the game didn't end up being worth it, the buying of it poisons the industry a little more. The main reason most games nowadays are shit is because we buy those shit games, even when they aren't worth the money. I'm ashamed to say that as a legitimate game consumer, I myself am guilty of doing this.

I don't deny that. But this is an issue with the developer for not providing a demo (or too short of a demo), or perhaps on the part of the consumer for not reading reviews beforehand to learn if the game is any good.

Let's say, for sake of argument, that I am a pirate. When I download a game, I give it a test run. It's no different from renting it or borrowing it from a friend, except the rental store doesn't get money from me. I play it a while, and gauge if the experience was worth it. If not, I delete it and never think about it again. It's not as if I was going to buy it anyway, so no harm done. The devs don't have any less money because of me. If I do deem it a worthy experience, I buy a copy. I buy a few copies to give to my friends as well. I buy a shirt, if there is one. I donate directly to the devs, if I can. And I talk about the game to whoever will listen.

If I were to steal a game and I ended up enjoying it, I feel it would be my moral obligation to give as much financial support as humanly possible to the development team. Part of that means that I become a walking advertisement for it for the next few months, or sometimes the next few years, or even the rest of my life, if the game is good enough. It also includes buying as much shit from them as I can. Because it's not about the stuff that I buy, it's about the fact that the devs earned my support, and so I'll give them as much of it as I can give. I can't speak for all pirates obviously, but the ones I know of have more or less that outlook on the industry. On the other hand, non pirates don't even think about the developers, or who's getting their money, or why. They're just used to spending money on shit, no matter what it is. I think developers get more respect from pirates than from the non pirates, in that case.

No, the developer doesn't (necessarily) lose money from pirates, but it's still theft.

Piracy basically springs from a sense of entitlement. You don't have to play every game that might interest you, and you don't have the right to get these games free.

I wasn't aware that you wanted any statistics. After all, nobody's given me any viable statistics in favor of your point of view. People just seem to take for granted the idea that whenever the game industry loses any control to its fans, it also loses a big hunk of money somehow. And people stand by that religiously, and make up these bullshit numbers off the top of their heads, in order to ... I don't know, prove a point I guess? Maybe.

Basically, it's a matter of comparison. Piracy is theft. If thieves were often inclined to reimburse their victims, then I can guarantee you people would be much less concerned about robbery. But when you look at what actually happens with everything from muggings to stuff like Enron, you see that even when they reap benefits at the expense of other people, thieves don't ever "pay back" what they've gained.

In theory, yes, it would be great if pirates bought games that they stole and enjoyed. But in practice, there's no real incentive to pay money for something you already have, and so piracy ends up being simple theft.

Also: here are my statistics [http://smellslikedonkey.com/wordpress/?page_id=274].

 

[enlargedhousecat]

need I remind

 

[DarthFennec]

Basically, it's a matter of comparison. Piracy is theft. If thieves were often inclined to reimburse their victims, then I can guarantee you people would be much less concerned about robbery. But when you look at what actually happens with everything from muggings to stuff like Enron, you see that even when they reap benefits at the expense of other people, thieves don't ever "pay back" what they've gained.

In theory, yes, it would be great if pirates bought games that they stole and enjoyed. But in practice, there's no real incentive to pay money for something you already have, and so piracy ends up being simple theft.

This guy has the right idea. Data piracy and theft are two completely different things. The immoral part of theft comes not from the thief having something he didn't have, but from the victim not having it anymore. If someone breaks into your house and steals your TV, that's theft, but if someone sits in their own house and uses some kind of machine to make an exact copy of your TV in their living room, there's no harm in it. Maybe Sony loses a few bucks to the guy because he didn't pay them for the TV, but if that kind of technology exists that can replicate things perfectly over large distances like that, I think Sony should expect people to do things like that. Because they will. At this point, buying TVs from Sony becomes less about having a TV and more about keeping business going to the guys that can give you more and better TVs. If not, they go bankrupt and die, and even though you got your TV for free, you'll never get a better one.

You can see the correlation between this fantasy and what's really happening with piracy. Thieves and pirates are not the same thing. The motive of the thief is usually desperation or selfishness; you have something they need/want and they'll take it from you. But in a world where it's so easy to copy things, like the internet, pirates are actually being given these things. They don't have to steal, it's not thievery. It's just sharing. Therefore, the motive is completely different.

It's obvious that artists and developers need money if they want to keep developing. If a pirate likes the way a game was developed, they're going to look forward to more. Anyone with half a braincell can put two and two together and realize that if the developer isn't paid, that's a bad thing for the pirate who's a fan. It's just logic, and most pirates are intelligent enough to have it. If you like a dev, you support them, because otherwise you won't hear from them again. That's not a thought process you see with thieves.

So, pirates have every incentive to pay. The vast majority of pirates have enough forethought to realize that paying helps create more games from that developer. It's a pity, in my mind, that more people don't seem capable of such forethought.

Piracy basically springs from a sense of entitlement. You don't have to play every game that might interest you, and you don't have the right to get these games free.

I have every right to play the game without paying the developer. It's called rental. I'm just bypassing the rental store. I expect now you'll whine at me about how I'm stealing money from Blockbuster Video, then.

I don't deny that. But this is an issue with the developer for not providing a demo (or too short of a demo), or perhaps on the part of the consumer for not reading reviews beforehand to learn if the game is any good.

Reviews and demos are as misleading as adverts and hype, surely any gamer understands that. To get a good enough feel for a game, it has to be actually played.

 

[UltimatheChosen]

This guy has the right idea. Data piracy and theft are two completely different things. The immoral part of theft comes not from the thief having something he didn't have, but from the victim not having it anymore. If someone breaks into your house and steals your TV, that's theft, but if someone sits in their own house and uses some kind of machine to make an exact copy of your TV in their living room, there's no harm in it. Maybe Sony loses a few bucks to the guy because he didn't pay them for the TV, but if that kind of technology exists that can replicate things perfectly over large distances like that, I think Sony should expect people to do things like that. Because they will. At this point, buying TVs from Sony becomes less about having a TV and more about keeping business going to the guys that can give you more and better TVs. If not, they go bankrupt and die, and even though you got your TV for free, you'll never get a better one.

Except that you're still depriving the seller of revenue from a sale. They spent time and, in most cases, a lot of money working on these games.

You can see the correlation between this fantasy and what's really happening with piracy. Thieves and pirates are not the same thing. The motive of the thief is usually desperation or selfishness; you have something they need/want and they'll take it from you. But in a world where it's so easy to copy things, like the internet, pirates are actually being given these things. They don't have to steal, it's not thievery. It's just sharing. Therefore, the motive is completely different.

I'll grant that there are differences, but that's still not a justification for piracy.

It's obvious that artists and developers need money if they want to keep developing. If a pirate likes the way a game was developed, they're going to look forward to more. Anyone with half a braincell can put two and two together and realize that if the developer isn't paid, that's a bad thing for the pirate who's a fan. It's just logic, and most pirates are intelligent enough to have it. If you like a dev, you support them, because otherwise you won't hear from them again. That's not a thought process you see with thieves.

So, pirates have every incentive to pay. The vast majority of pirates have enough forethought to realize that paying helps create more games from that developer. It's a pity, in my mind, that more people don't seem capable of such forethought.

And that would be great, if it were actually true. Did you read the link I posted?

If you had, you would see that out of the scores submitted for that game, 71.2% were from pirated copies.

They then analyzed the numbers to see how many of those pirates later bought the game and submitted scores from legitimately purchased copies of the game.

None of them ever did. Not one.

Another instructive example is this [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/100576-Who-Would-Pirate-the-One-Cent-Humble-Indie-Bundle]. These guys were selling a bundle of six games for one cent, and still had a 25% piracy rate. I can understand wanting to try a game before buying it, although I still find piracy reprehensible. But at the point where you're unwilling to pay $.01 for six games... that's just being an asshole. To make matters worse, some of these pirates actually downloaded the game from the developers instead of from other download sites, meaning that the people who made the game had to pay for the bandwidth of the people illegally downloading their game.

It's also worth noting that the 25% figure does not include BitTorrent or other such sources... just downloads via forum links, so the actual piracy rate was almost definitely higher... perhaps much higher.

*snip*

I have every right to play the game without paying the developer. It's called rental. I'm just bypassing the rental store. I expect now you'll whine at me about how I'm stealing money from Blockbuster Video, then.

Try reading what I write. I didn't say you have to pay the developer, I said you have to pay. Although, to be fair, I do think the gaming industry has a legitimate beef with used game sales, though I'm not sure what a good solution is there.

You made a huge logical jump from "I don't have to pay the publisher" to "I don't have to pay at all".

*snip*

Reviews and demos are as misleading as adverts and hype, surely any gamer understands that. To get a good enough feel for a game, it has to be actually played.

Personally, I have never had much trouble learning if a game is good by reading enough reviews. I look at Escapist reviews, Game Informer, and so on, and I try to learn which reviewers share my tastes.

If you do your research intelligently, it's possible to make a decision without, y'know, breaking the law.

 

[DarthFennec]

Except that you're still depriving the seller of revenue from a sale. They spent time and, in most cases, a lot of money working on these games.

I'm pretty sure I addressed that. As I said, the revenue a developer would get in this case becomes less about getting a copy of a game, and more about supporting the developer in order to get more and better games out of that dev in the future.

I'll grant that there are differences, but that's still not a justification for piracy.

I never said it was. The point of that paragraph was simply to illustrate that piracy and thievery are completely different things.

And that would be great, if it were actually true. Did you read the link I posted?

If you had, you would see that out of the scores submitted for that game, 71.2% were from pirated copies.

They then analyzed the numbers to see how many of those pirates later bought the game and submitted scores from legitimately purchased copies of the game.

None of them ever did. Not one.

Maybe none of them deemed it to be worth money. The fact that it has the complexity of a flash game (most of which are free in the first place) wouldn't help with that. I write flash games in my free time, and I devote a lot of time and love, trying to craft them into something pretty amazing, but I would be absolutely affronted by the idea of charging money for something like that. It seems like a ripoff.

Another instructive example is this [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/100576-Who-Would-Pirate-the-One-Cent-Humble-Indie-Bundle]. These guys were selling a bundle of six games for one cent, and still had a 25% piracy rate. I can understand wanting to try a game before buying it, even if I find the idea reprehensible. But at the point where you're unwilling to pay $.01 for six games... that's just being an asshole. To make matters worse, some of these pirates actually downloaded the game from the developers instead of torrents, meaning that the people who made the game had to pay for the bandwidth of the people illegally downloading their game.

I'd be very confused by an offer like that. I'd buy it if the price were higher, but one cent doesn't seem substantial enough to me, especially for six games. It doesn't seem likely that any developer who was planning on making any money from a game would sell for so little. That obviously is no excuse to pirate it, and I agree with you, the fact that the piracy rate was 25% is just sad. Although, I don't think I'd personally go through the trouble of typing in my card number, just to spend one cent. That's pretty ridiculous.

As a side note, I own one of the games in that bundle, Penumbra Overture, and I spent $20 on it. It's one of the best indie games I've ever played, and I recommend it to anyone who cares (but I recommend its sequel, Penumbra: Black Plague, even more).
/obligatory advertisement

You made a huge logical jump from "I don't have to pay the publisher" to "I don't have to pay at all".

Not really. The developers are the people who did the work, they're the artists, and any support that the game deserves is support for the developers. Isn't that what your whole argument is about, that developers aren't getting enough support from pirates? If I'm not paying them, then who should I pay, the next random joe that walks out of Walmart? He doesn't deserve my money. Blockbuster Video only deserves my money if I'm using their service, which I'm not either way. If I'm not paying the devs, I might as well be not paying at all, because nobody else did anything for me that deserves payment.

Personally, I have never had much trouble learning if a game is good by reading enough reviews. I look at Escapist reviews, Game Informer, and so on, and I try to learn which reviewers share my tastes.

If you do your research intelligently, it's possible to make a decision without, y'know, breaking the law.

I do lots of research on games that I want. I've been in situations where I've followed a game obsessively, sometimes for months, and I've learned every little thing about it, short of watching a Let's Play. I finally buy the game, pop it in, play it, and realize that it's actually a piece of shit. Every single time, this happens. All of the games I actually enjoy have been ones that my friends lend me, games that I've played firsthand before I buy. I guess I don't really know why reviews work for you and not for me.

Also, since piracy is free, it would expand my potential to buy more games. Instead of going and buying four games that I'm really interested in, and missing out on some really good ones that I kind of glanced at but decided they're not worth the money, a pirate could go play thirty games for free, and enjoy and buy nine of them. If there's a game that's worth the money, but I don't realize that it's worth it because of bad reviews and not too much hype, then I never end up playing it and the devs don't get my support. If I were to pirate it, I could tell that it was worth it before I buy, and then I could support the devs.