Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How the Dreamcast Copy Protection Was Defeated

fabiensanglard.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 169 posts

Re: How the Dreamcast Copy Protection Was Defeated

#141

Post by laumars »

nesyt wrote: post #139
laumars wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t recall Sony marketing the PS2 that heavily compared to the DC (nor even the Xbox). But memory can be fallible. The argument I was proposing was that the mindshare was in anticipation of the PS2 because of how the PS1 vs Saturn war panned out. Gamers can be loyal pack animals and Sega had already lost their fan base before the DC was even released thanks to the success of the PS1. > Dreamcast with ridiculous p…

Parent meant that Sony marketed the PS2 with undelivered promises.

Ahh yes. That would make more sense

Re: How the Dreamcast Copy Protection Was Defeated

#142

Post by laumars »

monocasa wrote: post #132
laumars wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t recall Sony marketing the PS2 that heavily compared to the DC (nor even the Xbox). But memory can be fallible. The argument I was proposing was that the mindshare was in anticipation of the PS2 because of how the PS1 vs Saturn war panned out. Gamers can be loyal pack animals and Sega had already lost their fan base before the DC was even released thanks to the success of the PS1. > Dreamcast with ridiculous p…

Sony did all sorts of marketing stunts to keep the idea of the PS2 in the limelight. They spread stories about how Iraq was trying to buy them for their weapons program because they were so powerful, etc. https://www.theregister.co.uk/2000/12/19/iraq_buys_4000_play...

I’d completely forgotten about those stories!

Re: How the Dreamcast Copy Protection Was Defeated

#143

Post by tangue »

naraic0o wrote: post #83
tangue wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Windows CE was loaded from the disks and was an option for developers. The dreamcast had another os which were more close to the naomi arcade machine

The article claims that the hardware contained no "OS" and that all discs were self-contained full-linked OSes.

There was a rudimentary os when you boot without gd-rom. It allowed you to set settings, manage memory cards etc I suspect it was loaded just in case where there were no os on the gdrom inserted otherwise the system will boot on the gdrom os. Edit : video link https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5L9p_Bq_hFk

Re: How the Dreamcast Copy Protection Was Defeated

#144

Post by notyourwork »

jandrese wrote: post #108
notyourwork wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

BitTorrent wasn’t how pirated material was distributed in those days. DCC over Irc and FTP were widely used at this time.

Wasn't it LimeWire/Kazaa? My early P2P history is a little fuzzy. The big issue is that so many people were still on modems back then that downloading a DC game wasn't easy. Plus public WiFi wasn't really a thing yet. It was the kids on college campuses who were connected to brand new and shiny Ethernet networks that really went nuts.

These applications weren't really where piracy derived, these applications along with a cable modem made it possible for point and click piracy. Similar to Napster. The scene which as others pointed at actually started in newsgroups and shifted to IRC and FTP was where piracy was extremely prevalent.

Re: How the Dreamcast Copy Protection Was Defeated

#146

Post by taco_emoji »

gwbas1c wrote: post #61

> SEGA engineers knew that MIL-CD booting could be used as an attack vector so they added a protection. > The mashed potatoes problem was solved when a Katana SDK (the official Sega SDK for the Dreamcast) was stolen[6] by the hacking team "Utopia" in late 1999. It turned out that the scrambler was nothing more than "security through obscurity". I doubt this was security through obscurity. Most likely, it was hard (or…

> all encryption is "security by obscurity."

Sure, I guess, in a sort of pedantic sense, but the point is that a robust cryptosystem must have the "obscure" information as a dynamic input variable, like an encryption key -- if the key is discovered, you discard it and use a new one, and the cryptosystem as a whole is still intact. Moreover, discovery of my key doesn't make your encrypted data any less secure.

If, however, the obscure information is a static, integral component like this scrambling algorithm, then discovery means the entire system is now compromised.

Re: How the Dreamcast Copy Protection Was Defeated

#147

Post by jolmg »

smacktoward wrote: post #131
larrik wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AS I remember it, the mindshare of the PS2 even so long before launch was immense. Sony's marketing killed the Dreamcast with ridiculous promises that really didn't pan out. You can't just look back and compare the systems, the idea of the PS2 killed the DC.

Yep. A good example was the branding of the PS2's processor as the "Emotion Engine," ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotion_Engine ) which in the runup to release got hyped as some kind of fundamental breakthrough in computing that would let the PS2 render things like faces with so much detail they'd be able to break your heart. This was all bunkum, of course, but it ensured that all the media oxygen got sucked into…

> A good example was the branding of the PS2's processor as the "Emotion Engine," (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotion_Engine) which in the runup to release got hyped as some kind of fundamental breakthrough in computing that would let the PS2 render things like faces with so much detail they'd be able to break your heart.

That reminds me of the hype around the PS3's cell processor. There was a lot of videos comparing the graphics between the PS3 and the Xbox360 that showed really no difference between the two. I don't know enough about processor architectures to know how awesome it really was. However, I imagine that a game studio making a game for both platforms would use the least common denominator of both consoles, causing them to look the same. Also, it's probably in the best interest of the studio for a game to have a consistent look across platforms.

I wonder if the cell processor was really as awesome as it was made out to be. Going by what one heard, you'd think Sony was losing money from manufacturing costs with each console sold. Then again, maybe it's true in a sense. While the PS3 was $600 and had bluray movie playback as some small feature, bluray players cost around a $1000. It was crazy to see people eyeing those things, considering buying them.

Re: How the Dreamcast Copy Protection Was Defeated

#149

Post by rasz »

dsco wrote: post #6

Related and _very_ inspiring; how the Sega Saturn CD was cracked after 20 years. Even my very non-technical girlfriend sat through this thing, being intrigued by the dedication. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOyfZex7B3E

Its a great story, told in a video with high production value, too bad its "innacurate". Saturn was cracked 20 years ago, you could mod it easily and play copied games. There also did exist complete CD emulators before https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12075653

Re: How the Dreamcast Copy Protection Was Defeated

#150

Post by rasz »

laurent123456 wrote: post #58

Interesting that they've invested so much in designing a new unique type of CD-ROM, even being the only one to manufacture it, and then being caught by a feature they didn't even need. The obfuscating trick was also kind of lazy from the dev team who added it. But I don't think this hacking was the reason for the end of Sega, because nearly all consoles at that time could be modded to play hacked games. Sega had been…

They didnt, GDROM is a slight tweak to CDROM standard, just enough to make it not readable in standard drives.
Post reply on HN