source code found?
- Paramultart
- VBB's Partner in Crime
- Posts: 3004
- Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 8:36
I guess K1n9_Duk3 is right.
An unauthorized copy of the source wouldn't be very useful if we couldn't release the modified executables.
I just wish they found the source code earlier when there was a good chance of it being released. (When ID Software was controlled by a group of very awesome nerds.)
Now that the big bloated Zenimax owns ID, and Carmack isn't even involved anymore, there's no chance of those rich bigwigs ever continuing the ID tradition of releasing free source code.
An unauthorized copy of the source wouldn't be very useful if we couldn't release the modified executables.
I just wish they found the source code earlier when there was a good chance of it being released. (When ID Software was controlled by a group of very awesome nerds.)
Now that the big bloated Zenimax owns ID, and Carmack isn't even involved anymore, there's no chance of those rich bigwigs ever continuing the ID tradition of releasing free source code.
"Father Mabeuf was surveying his plants"
My understanding of all this is quite limited, but would it be fair to say that knowing the source code could lead to more sophisticated patches - rather than necessarily having to modify the exe, so that in actual fact legality would be no more an obstacle than it's ever been with modding?!? If the modifications of the code are particularly big, then perhaps a more advanced ckpatch, and more generous memory settings e.g. in Dosbox, could facilitate them.if we couldn't release the modified executables
As Lemm will tell you, altering the source is far easier than patching. Patches are in machine code which needs to be translated.
I'm not sure if they'd care about modified executables, not as long as nobody was making any money. That's the golden rule of business. Of course it would be a trivial matter to convert a modified executable into a series of patches and thus get around things that way.
I'm not sure if they'd care about modified executables, not as long as nobody was making any money. That's the golden rule of business. Of course it would be a trivial matter to convert a modified executable into a series of patches and thus get around things that way.
What you really need, not what you think you ought to want.
- DaVince
- lazy/busy Keener
- Posts: 1476
- Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 15:34
- Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands
- Contact:
I was about to say. Also, source code from disassembled code is based on the optimized code and stripped of any useful information like function and variable names, comments, et cetera. This stuff is just easier if you have the original, unaltered source.Levellass wrote:As Lemm will tell you, altering the source is far easier than patching. Patches are in machine code which needs to be translated.
Wow look at me I'm lurking
- Paramultart
- VBB's Partner in Crime
- Posts: 3004
- Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 8:36
I've never had any problems poking around a game's source code, but the disassemblies I've seen are a nightmare for your average programmer or modding hobbyist.
If I didn't know any better, I'd think Lemm and Lass were behind suppressing the source releases to assume dominance over the modding community.
Hmm....
If I didn't know any better, I'd think Lemm and Lass were behind suppressing the source releases to assume dominance over the modding community.
Hmm....
"Father Mabeuf was surveying his plants"
Actually we're engaged in a war. Lemm wants to force everyone to use The One True Source while I want to stick to the True Path of machine code. Whoever wins, you lose.
(Though the differences between us are remarkable. Lemm's patches are littered with comments. I mean *littered*; #push Seriously? You need to keep track of that? You need to annotate *everything*? And you say machine code is confusing? I don't know, maybe this is why women never get into programming.
(Though the differences between us are remarkable. Lemm's patches are littered with comments. I mean *littered*; #push Seriously? You need to keep track of that? You need to annotate *everything*? And you say machine code is confusing? I don't know, maybe this is why women never get into programming.
What you really need, not what you think you ought to want.
DaVince wrote:Also, source code from disassembled code is based on the optimized code and stripped of any useful information like function and variable names, comments, et cetera. This stuff is just easier if you have the original, unaltered source.
When I say "disassembling" I mean running a disassembler on the original EXE and then assigning names for all the functions and variables. That is what I would call a "complete" disassembly.K1n9_Duk3 wrote:I am not saying that it would be an easy task, but it is definitely possible.
Doing such a complete disassembly requires some knowledge about the hardware handling. In case of Keen 4-6 and Dreams, all of this is in the ID_* engine files, which were released as part of the Catacomb 3-D and Keen Dreams sources (in slightly modified versions, probably), so you have some reference to work with. The rest are the game-specific routines such as actor movement and AI routines, which should be known considering the fact that there are patches to change that behavior.
Once you have a "complete" disassembly, you can start porting the code back to C and you'll end up with something very similar to the original code -- if you did it right. A talented person could do all of this in a matter of months.
Hail to the K1n9, baby!
http://k1n9duk3.shikadi.net
http://k1n9duk3.shikadi.net
Levellass wrote:Actually we're engaged in a war. Lemm wants to force everyone to use The One True Source while I want to stick to the True Path of machine code. Whoever wins, you lose.
(Though the differences between us are remarkable. Lemm's patches are littered with comments. I mean *littered*; #push Seriously? You need to keep track of that? You need to annotate *everything*? And you say machine code is confusing? I don't know, maybe this is why women never get into programming.
I don't want to force the issue, but it seems that everything has gone to sith. I'm not taking this lightly, though. I think we're all just wandering, jetting and eyeing each other around in a dark room.
Cosmo II: HUMANIZED!!! Progress:
Graphics: 15% Complete
Story: 100% Complete
Music: 5% Complete
Programming Modifications: 5% Complete (FINALLY! SOME PROGRESS!)
http://www.tsqproductions.com
Graphics: 15% Complete
Story: 100% Complete
Music: 5% Complete
Programming Modifications: 5% Complete (FINALLY! SOME PROGRESS!)
http://www.tsqproductions.com
This is all very much true. I'm as green as a new spring bud, but looking through the stuff we have I can't see any reason why we couldn't make our own source code (With blackjack! And hookers!)K1n9_Duk3 wrote:Doing such a complete disassembly requires some knowledge about the hardware handling. In case of Keen 4-6 and Dreams, all of this is in the ID_* engine files, which were released as part of the Catacomb 3-D and Keen Dreams sources (in slightly modified versions, probably), so you have some reference to work with. The rest are the game-specific routines such as actor movement and AI routines, which should be known considering the fact that there are patches to change that behavior.
Once you have a "complete" disassembly, you can start porting the code back to C and you'll end up with something very similar to the original code -- if you did it right. A talented person could do all of this in a matter of months.
What you really need, not what you think you ought to want.