undefined | Better HN

0 pointsmtgx13y ago0 comments

I hate how DRM is being thrown around as a "turn-key" solution against piracy, because it's simply wrong. What's stopping anyone from selling copies of heavily DRM'ed - but cracked - games right now? Nothing.

Actually, WebGL games would be a lot more secure from piracy, because they would be online, and you could easily stop 99% of the piracy by requiring a login for the game. It's basically like the Diablo 3 model, only better. Because Diablo 3 should be easier to crack and play on private servers (not sure if even that has happened yet).

Making an "online game" instead of a native "PC game" is the best way to stop most of the piracy.

0 comments

2 comments · 1 top-level

Strom13y ago· 1 in thread

Diablo 3 is definitely not easier to crack. You need to know x86 assembly, and on top of that beat Blizzard's reflection-ish protection that checks for modified code. JavaScript is much easier to deal with.

In addition to that, just cracking the Diablo 3 client isn't enough, because a lot of the game logic runs exclusively on the server. For example, even with tens of thousands of test runs of a specific monster, you still won't know the correct item drop probability table, because that table is never sent to the client. Only the result of the server-side dice roll checked against the server-side loot table.

__--__13y ago

>Diablo 3 is definitely not easier to crack.

Moot point. Any client software can and will be cracked, regardless of how difficult it is to crack. Which is mtgx's point - online games are easier to secure because you can put logic and validation on a remote server. No DRM needed. Your example of Diablo 3 only proves his point. It's not the DRM that makes Diablo 3 hard to crack - it's the server side logic and validation.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse