|
|
| Page 4 of 12 |
|
|
 Posted: Thu, 13th Nov 2008 21:33 Post subject: |
|
 |
First off, a coupleof things:
1. However Microsoft is determining what units to ban, it seems to flag them. You might be offline, unplugged, when it determines you have a modded console.
2. Microsoft rolls out a ban wave once or twice a year. The ban wave bans users in phases, so you might already be flagged, but it might take days before they get to you.
3. It's probable that Microsoft also only bans, say, 80% of the flagged consoles.
This is done to cause confusion in the scene and prevent, as much as possible, from the community figuring out exactly how Microsoft is determining who is modded.
The prevailing theory right now hangs on the unusual number of "review" releases that came out EXACTLY ONE MONTH BEFORE this ban wave. Poison pill releases? Very possible.
That said, not everyone who played a review copy will get banned in this wave.
Aso consider something about "revierw copies" - don't reviewers get dev kits to play games on? Aren't review games unsigned? Why would a "review" copy even be playable on a retail Xbox 360?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 00:31 Post subject: |
|
|
| BenJeremy wrote: |
This is done to cause confusion in the scene and prevent, as much as possible, from the community figuring out exactly how Microsoft is determining who is modded.
The prevailing theory right now hangs on the unusual number of "review" releases that came out EXACTLY ONE MONTH BEFORE this ban wave. Poison pill releases? Very possible. |
If Microsoft had the ability to ban everyone with hacked firmware, they would. They wouldn't let a few go to "cause confusion".
Moreover, I don't buy conspiracy theory's on review releases. NO DEVELOPER OR PUBLISHER wants something leaked early, no matter how it is leaked or for what purpose. The lost money would not justify catching a few pirates.
It appears to be very random, with little rhyme or reason from what I perceive
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deelix
PDIP Member
Posts: 32062
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 00:51 Post subject: |
|
|
| TheGame110011001 wrote: | not banned (have 2 xboxes)
think most bans are being made in USA and UK |
Well seems like MS had no problem finding the Norwegian IP range -.-
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 00:58 Post subject: |
|
|
| tedrotheredro wrote: | | BenJeremy wrote: |
This is done to cause confusion in the scene and prevent, as much as possible, from the community figuring out exactly how Microsoft is determining who is modded.
The prevailing theory right now hangs on the unusual number of "review" releases that came out EXACTLY ONE MONTH BEFORE this ban wave. Poison pill releases? Very possible. |
If Microsoft had the ability to ban everyone with hacked firmware, they would. They wouldn't let a few go to "cause confusion".
Moreover, I don't buy conspiracy theory's on review releases. NO DEVELOPER OR PUBLISHER wants something leaked early, no matter how it is leaked or for what purpose. The lost money would not justify catching a few pirates.
It appears to be very random, with little rhyme or reason from what I perceive |
Agreed.
Plus Microsoft could only order their own company to leak a game early, they certainly couldn't call Bethseda up and say "please give a marked F3 to your local pirate for our little experiment"  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 01:24 Post subject: |
|
|
What does Microsoft and THQ have to lose if they take a beta or alpha version, remove achievements and Live access, and add a few lines to flag the Xbox for banning when it eventually connects?
The game would already be hitting the internet a few days before it hits the shelf, so why not set out the "honey pot"?
Actually, the chances of this are rapidly approaching 100%, because the "Review copies" are most certainly bogus. Microsoft does not sign anything but Retail Images, ready for pressing. We know the "review" releases were NOT retail images.... so who signed them? You all realize the computer used to sign retail images is locked down tighter than Fort Knox, right?
Reviewers get DEV KIT CONSOLES, which play unsigned code. They get DVD-Rs burned by developers to review games. The nice thing for Microsoft is that these images are useless "in the wild" since they are NOT SIGNED. That wasn't true on the original Xbox, but you aren't going to run unsigned code on an Xbox 360 (at least one that connects to Live... the King Kong exploit requires an old kernel that won't run on Live).
Simple deduction demonstrates that the so-called "review copies":
1. Aren't review copies
2. Aren't retail images.
3. Were given a media code for Pressed DVD-ROM
4. Were SIGNED to run in a retail Xbox 360
This leads to a conclusion that anybody with an IQ higher than their body temperature can figure out. Microsoft planted these games.
They released the game because it was inevitably going to be released anyway. They concocted the "review copy" story to cover the fact that the functionality was hobbled, graphic were older, and they were OBVIOUSLY not the retail versions. By releasing it so eary, they beat the retail release, ensuring those "filthy pirates" would be greedy enough to download it and try it out. 90% of those people weren't going to buy the game, anyway, and the other 10% would probably buy the game anyway when they get banned, along with a new console. Best of all for Microsoft, they scare a good percentage of them out of the piracy scene.
Doubt me? I've been a big part of the Xbox scene for years, and I'm a software engineer with 25 years of experience.
Look at the people getting banned.... almost ALL of them admit to playing the pre-release SR2 or FO3.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 01:34 Post subject: |
|
|
Your theory can be true because I dont see MS signing review copies for every game out there that is sent to the press so they can review it and then, RESIGN the final RTM code again. So it's very likely press people are having dev kits.
Maybe a reviewer can clarify this ?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 01:36 Post subject: |
|
|
Doesn't the piracy scene actually boost console sales? If 360 wasn't moddable, everybody wouldve gone with PS3 already (especailly if you consider the insane hardware failure rate of the 360).
ASUS Maximus XII Formula | Core i9 10900k @ 5.2Ghz | 32GB G.Skill DDR4 4200Mhz | EVGA RTX 3080 Ti FTW3 Ultra Hydro Copper | ASUS ROG PG35VQ
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 01:38 Post subject: |
|
|
MS still loses money on us pirating games... Because the console is cheap, most of their money is earned from their game. Of course you are right on one point : I wouldn't have bought the x360 if i couldnt flash it, although i'm not sure all of us there did a favour pirating all these games and buying a 200 euros console rather than not buying it at all and let other xbox360 users buy all the games.
See for instance, Sony doesn't want its PS3 to be hacked ; every time there is a small exploit that could lead to something and they close it. Sony doesn't want their console to be hacked, so I'm sure they earn more with you buying their games...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 01:52 Post subject: |
|
|
| cyclonefr wrote: | MS still loses money on us pirating games... Because the console is cheap, most of their money is earned from their game. Of course you are right on one point : I wouldn't have bought the x360 if i couldnt flash it, although i'm not sure all of us there did a favour pirating all these games and buying a 200 euros console rather than not buying it at all and let other xbox360 users buy all the games.
See for instance, Sony doesn't want its PS3 to be hacked ; every time there is a small exploit that could lead to something and they close it. Sony doesn't want their console to be hacked, so I'm sure they earn more with you buying their games... |
Actually, Microsoft has been making money on every Xbox 360 console sold since proably 4 months after launch. They als continue to have the highest attach rate of any console, ever (even over PS2 and the SNES).
...but oddly enough, people with modded Xbox and Xbox 360 consoles probably averaged about the same attach rate as those with non-modded systems, which bucks the trend from other hacked systems.
It's very difficut to argue "XXX loses money from piracy" without some sort of figures that supports what the sales of a particuar game would have been without piracy. Many pirates are collectors.... they have far more games they only played for 10 minutes, and most people only have a handful of games they've ever put any significant time into. What's the difference between a pirate and a game renter?
The homebrew scene definitely boosted the reputation of the original Xbox, though... and developers loved it, even though it was effectively cracked wide open. Publishers rarely lost money selling an Xbox game, and they rarely do on 360 games, as wel, even with the piracy.
If you can keep the pandora's box closed, great.... but once your system is "hacked" the landscape changes. It's a different dynamic that companies must adjust to, and fighting piracy is suddenly dependent on many factors. Microsoft burned themselves with their shortsightedness (Firmguard), so their effort has been limited to indirectly fighting pirates.
Some studies have been done to try and quanitfy the sales lost to piracy of music, movies and games, but none have ever been successful. Mosty, it seems, that without pirating, we just spend far less on games and spend more time with what we purchase. Industry studies, of course, unrealistically project massive losses, but simple ogic demonstrates the idiocy of their conclusions.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 02:05 Post subject: |
|
|
I think you are right, seriously 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 02:41 Post subject: |
|
|
why did I mod my 360? b/c GTA4 was released early. If it hadn't been released early, I would have waited and bought it. I'm sure the same thing happened with Fallout 3. I'm no stranger to modding, but the 360 was/is prone to RROD, so it took an incentive like an early release for me to mod it.
Bethesda/Microsoft lose money because they lose hype and publicity. Imagine how big October 28th is without justintv, youtube, and forum discussions and impressions about the game weeks beforehand. Ever noticed that game reviews are released on the day the game is released, and not a day before? Same principle.
Microsoft "planting" the copy is ridiculous. If that were true, everyone who played Fallout 3 or Saints Row 2 would be banned, and that didn't happen.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nouseforaname
Über-VIP Member
Posts: 21306
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 04:09 Post subject: |
|
|
I just connected to live and I am still not banned! I played a RF PAL game last week so I thought I would be banned for sure. Maybe they just haven't gotten to me yet. Tomb Raider Underworld demo is pretty sweet. Just need the NTSC version now.
MD
Intel C2D E6600 @ 3gHZ - EVGA 680i (P24) - Sapphire HD4870 775/4200 - 2x1GB OCZ XTC Platinum @ 808mHZ - ASUS Xonar D2 PCI Ultra Fidelity - Logitec Z5500 - Windows 7 Ultimate RTM - Corsair TX750 PSU - Plextor SATA 16X 755SA - "Death is only the beginning"
PS3 80GB
X360 1.61 IXtreme Banned Edition
Wii Homebrewed!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
grimmmy
Posts: 1014
Location: London
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 04:33 Post subject: |
|
|
| thirtywinter wrote: | Wo Wo Wo... hang on a minute here... Where are we getting this information from that reviewers get dev kits??? I seriously doubt that. You have a link or anything to back that claim up?
|
Yeah. I'd like to see evidence as well.
If that were the case, why where all the GTAIV previews and reviews done on an invite only basis behind locked doors? If the review copy is useless in the wild, then why so much effort to keep a game quiet?
The concept of these "review" copies being planted by MS is insane if you ask me. And yes, they'd have banned everyone they knew about imo. The scene is always taking measures to secure itself so why would MS let so many people play burns while they get more and more secure? Make more sense to hit them all, stop them all and then worry when someone re-cracks the problem.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 06:41 Post subject: |
|
|
it´s no so crazy,you have to admit that a lot of releases come some fast just one month before this ban.
And the devkits for magazines and websites looks rational, in that way the review versions can only run in those boxes only.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 07:08 Post subject: |
|
|
| grimmmy wrote: | | thirtywinter wrote: | Wo Wo Wo... hang on a minute here... Where are we getting this information from that reviewers get dev kits??? I seriously doubt that. You have a link or anything to back that claim up?
|
Yeah. I'd like to see evidence as well.
If that were the case, why where all the GTAIV previews and reviews done on an invite only basis behind locked doors? If the review copy is useless in the wild, then why so much effort to keep a game quiet?
The concept of these "review" copies being planted by MS is insane if you ask me. And yes, they'd have banned everyone they knew about imo. The scene is always taking measures to secure itself so why would MS let so many people play burns while they get more and more secure? Make more sense to hit them all, stop them all and then worry when someone re-cracks the problem. |
It would have nothing to do with having absolute control over what is run and how it is run. You are so right.
All of you who think it would be ridicuous for Microsoft to send out a Poison Pill must be absolutely correct. Forgive my impertinence.
I'll defer to your in depth knowledge of the scene and all things XBox-related.
Me, I'll hang my head in shame for having stuck my nose into the scene for the past 7 years, including writing homebrew games, a menu system, and contributing to efforts to hack the original Xbox.... also I'l now regret that I spent 5 years as a Head Moderator at Xbox-Scene.
Geesh.
What part of a dev kit do you not understand?
Do any of you have a clue what it would cost Microsoft to press advanced copies of a game just for a handful of reviewers? Do you have a clue how Xbox and Xbox 360 games are validated? Do you understand the role a single 1024-bit key plays in Microsoft's DRM scheme?
When games are developed they are unsigned. They remain unsigned until they are ready for pressing into a retail disc.... at that point, the executables are "signed" in some facility in Redomond, on a computer that has no network connection and is kept in a very secure location. I doubt there are less than 4 or 5 people present whenever that room is opened and the PC used to sign the executables. The signed exeuctables are then brought to another computer where the final "retail image" is compiled. This image is brought to another secure faciity to create a master disc. This is expensive... it incorporates security features not found on a "normal" DVD-ROM. The master is taken to a production facility where game discs are pressed for mass production.
None of this is trivial. Just to get signed, an application has undergone certification and half a dozen management levels have signed off after extensive conferences.
What does this have to do with "Review copies"? Because there may only be a handful of review copies sent out - only the most important magazines will get a preview, so we are talking 10, maybe 20 copies, tops. Until last month, not a single release has been out as a "review copy", this is because, yes, reviewers - the important ones who get advance review copies - have Development Kits. Development Kits play unsigned games. Unsigned games, however, cannot be played on a retail Xbox 360 console. Without that ultra-secret 1024-bit signature key, you cannot MAKE that unsigned game work on a retail Xbox 360. It's very safe to send out an advance copy to one of these reviewers because #1: the images can't ever run on a retail Xbox 360 anyway and #2: the number of reviewers is so smal, none of them will risk the trouble they'll get for releasing a game even if it was possible.
The GTA IV demo was meant to be conducted in a strictly controlled environment. It wasn't about letting copies loose, it was about not giving reviewers a chance to see gaping holes in the code and maps by steering them through situations, as well as supervising them in case they found trouble and "managing" tthe damage control if such a thing happened.
Microsoft did sign one thing in the past in a rush, and it burned them - the original DVD-R demo disc at launch. It would have taken too long and cost too much to make pressed discs. They weren't happy that got out - do you honestly think they'd risk advance "review" versions of the game by sending them out signed? Why would they do that? Why would they ever have to when all they need to do is send out a dozen or so dev kits to those important magazine reviewers? Dev kits make a nice bit of swag for them, too, while being "neccessary" which is a bonus for Microsoft in terms of harboring good will from the reviewers.
If you don't want to believe me then PLEASE, get the "review copies" of Saints Row2 and Fallout 3 and play them on your unbanned consoles. Please, please also do it while unconnected - I insist. If I'm being "ridiculous" in my theory, then you have nothing to worry about.
Follow up in a few days by trying to connect to Live, then come back afterward and let me know how it turns out for you.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 09:44 Post subject: |
|
|
| BenJeremy wrote: | | grimmmy wrote: | | thirtywinter wrote: | Wo Wo Wo... hang on a minute here... Where are we getting this information from that reviewers get dev kits??? I seriously doubt that. You have a link or anything to back that claim up?
|
Yeah. I'd like to see evidence as well.
If that were the case, why where all the GTAIV previews and reviews done on an invite only basis behind locked doors? If the review copy is useless in the wild, then why so much effort to keep a game quiet?
The concept of these "review" copies being planted by MS is insane if you ask me. And yes, they'd have banned everyone they knew about imo. The scene is always taking measures to secure itself so why would MS let so many people play burns while they get more and more secure? Make more sense to hit them all, stop them all and then worry when someone re-cracks the problem. |
It would have nothing to do with having absolute control over what is run and how it is run. You are so right.
All of you who think it would be ridicuous for Microsoft to send out a Poison Pill must be absolutely correct. Forgive my impertinence.
* snip *
Geesh.
What part of a dev kit do you not understand?
Do any of you have a clue what it would cost Microsoft to press advanced copies of a game just for a handful of reviewers? Do you have a clue how Xbox and Xbox 360 games are validated? Do you understand the role a single 1024-bit key plays in Microsoft's DRM scheme?
* snip *
If you don't want to believe me then PLEASE, get the "review copies" of Saints Row2 and Fallout 3 and play them on your unbanned consoles. Please, please also do it while unconnected - I insist. If I'm being "ridiculous" in my theory, then you have nothing to worry about.
Follow up in a few days by trying to connect to Live, then come back afterward and let me know how it turns out for you. |
Actually, I have played both the so called SR2 and Fallout 3 "review" copies pre-launch with no ill effect. Maybe I'll get banned tomorrow, next week, next month, maybe never. And I am not the only one either..
Once again, I am simply asking for the source of all this wonderful information that you put out. Or is this simply conjecture and guess work from the "conspiracy" crowd?
If you want to believe there is some sort of grand conspiracy here, be my guest.
I feel better without wearing my tinfoil hat. 
My point is still that it doesn't make ANY business sense what-so-ever for MS/THQ/Bethesda/what have you to sneak out a couple of "poison pills" or whatever you want to call it simply to catch ten thousand (or whatever that number might be) modded consoles so they can ban them from Xbox live! Only one that gains from that is MS that will see a brief spike in their Arcade sales.
So you tell me then.. why would Bethesda or THQ agree to this just so they can sit back and look at consoles being banned from Xbox Live? That is the part that just really doesn't make any sense what so ever to me.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 10:07 Post subject: |
|
|
Concerning dev kits / 'debug consoles'. I can swear on the bible the reviewers have them - even in Russia (with its bears in the streets, vodka for breakfast and all other myths). Seen 'em myself, played them myself. At least three different publishing houses have them, both 360 and PS3. And yes, the review copies are never signed to run on standard xboxes.
"Only one country can destroy NATO in 40 minutes - it's Russia"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deelix
PDIP Member
Posts: 32062
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 10:21 Post subject: |
|
|
There are 6 devkits in total in Norway. I know a guy that can buy one for 6000 NOK, but he didn't need it even tho he think it was worth it ^^
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 10:24 Post subject: |
|
|
It's totally not worth it - you can't do anything with except playing the 1 (one) stolen NFSUC build.
"Only one country can destroy NATO in 40 minutes - it's Russia"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deelix
PDIP Member
Posts: 32062
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 10:25 Post subject: |
|
|
lol, I bet you get all the chicks... when you're like: "babe, know what? Iv got a 360 devkit..."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 10:30 Post subject: |
|
|
| BenJeremy wrote: |
Actually, Microsoft has been making money on every Xbox 360 console sold since proably 4 months after launch. |
I seriously doubt that. Maybe on the actual manufacturing costs per unit, but factor in the years of R&D and the $1bn hit they took for the RRoD debacle and it's unlikely MS will even come close to breaking even. The value in the Xbox brand to MS is the extension into the living room.
Agree 100% with everything else you've said in this thread.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dsergei
Posts: 4053
Location: Moscow, Russia
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 10:36 Post subject: |
|
|
| thirtywinter wrote: | | So you tell me then.. why would Bethesda or THQ agree to this just so they can sit back and look at consoles being banned from Xbox Live? That is the part that just really doesn't make any sense what so ever to me. |
Not saying anything about the cospiracy theory but since all the games have to be signed by MS can't they you know just not tell the other companies about the leaks?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 10:41 Post subject: |
|
|
I think it's pretty obvious why MS isn't banning everyone:
- small but regular banwaves scare off enough people that lay off piracy = $$ for MS
- a lot of modified xbox users still pay for their Live membership and occasionally buy some stuff like the XBLA games = $$ for MS
if they ban everyone they'll lose most of those people as clients forever. And a few stories (real or fake) about innocent users getting banned for nothing would be enough to scare new potential cleints that'd choose PS3 instead.
"Only one country can destroy NATO in 40 minutes - it's Russia"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 12:48 Post subject: |
|
|
Releasing review copies to ban people is highly unlikely because of the simple fact that banning users does not stop them from pirating. The xbox still works, still plays pirated games and users will continue their habit. At least I will.
And I bought a PS3 as well, just so I could keep playing the games online I really like. Every xbox they ban, loses MS money (no more XBLA income, no more Live income) and that money sometimes goes directly to Sony.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 12:59 Post subject: |
|
|
There's no review copies released.
"Only one country can destroy NATO in 40 minutes - it's Russia"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 13:43 Post subject: |
|
|
ok, banned now.
except Live, would I still be able to play backups in the future?
I mean, after the NXE launch?
Interinactive wrote:
Achievement unlocked: More unoptimised than a Ubishit game
No worries. The Division is just around the corner. Devil Troll
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 15:14 Post subject: |
|
|
The thing about MS planting review copies of games, is just bullshit imo. Someone I know is a reviewer for a site, he got Saints Row 2 early to review it, and he could play on Live with a retail 360.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Nov 2008 15:27 Post subject: |
|
|
i cant connect to live yet due to installing the nxe but looks like i still aint banned as it shows Z: 0000 - 0000
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 4 of 12 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
|
 |
|
