Jump to content


Photo

starforce 3.X


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 clay

clay

    1% Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

Posted 25 June 2004 - 06:23 PM

hi,

what is about starforce protection 3.x? Is it technical possible?

thx

#2 zamiel

zamiel

    Forum Support

  • Administration
  • 8,841 posts

Posted 26 June 2004 - 01:39 AM

This is being worked on as we speak. Technically anything is possible, its just a matter of finding out ways to back it up successfully.

#3 Profi

Profi

    10% Member

  • +Alcohol-Customer
  • 10 posts

Posted 18 July 2004 - 09:45 PM

New release-date ?

When will be possible, starforce 3.x to be copied on some hardware (burners)?

#4 zamiel

zamiel

    Forum Support

  • Administration
  • 8,841 posts

Posted 19 July 2004 - 05:48 AM

Alcohol-Software has a strict policy of not releasing any dates for updates. This is because quite often these dates can come and go due to technical difficulties during the testing phase. Once the build is deemed stable and the Development Team are happy, then it will get released without the pressure of trying to meet a date or within a given timeframe.

#5 Profi

Profi

    10% Member

  • +Alcohol-Customer
  • 10 posts

Posted 19 July 2004 - 06:54 AM

its enough, when 1 or 2 hardware-combi would be copied successfully starforce. it must be not done with alle burners/drives on the world. This would be helpfully for many people. see plex premium and blindwrite 5 with securom 5.x - combination of 1:1 copies without any emulations !!!

And 1 or 2 hardware-combis is possible and faster to make it compatible with alcohol. concentrate on some hardware not on all.

Edited by Profi, 19 July 2004 - 06:55 AM.


#6 Jito463

Jito463

    Forum Support

  • Support Team
  • 5,625 posts

Posted 19 July 2004 - 09:57 AM

Unlike BW, Alcohol prefers to make their software useful for all their customers - or at least the vast majority - and not just a select few. The Plex thing has been brought up before, and was dismissed for the sole fact that it would benefit only a small portion of the customer base. It may be implemented in the future, but not before the larger customer base is taken care of first.

#7 Profi

Profi

    10% Member

  • +Alcohol-Customer
  • 10 posts

Posted 19 July 2004 - 12:01 PM

QUOTE (Jito463 @ Jul 19 2004, 11:09 AM)
Unlike BW, Alcohol prefers to make their software useful for all their customers - or at least the vast majority - and not just a select few. The Plex thing has been brought up before, and was dismissed for the sole fact that it would benefit only a small portion of the customer base. It may be implemented in the future, but not before the larger customer base is taken care of first.

Then the alcohol-team can delete the predefined profiles for all starforce and securom 5.x. This profiles can actually only burn a few customers (maybe 5%). Thats the point of my question. You make predefined profiles for this protections, but only few customers can use this. Why not specified for some hardware-combos. Thats the solution. Many people would buy this hardware-combos, when you say this combo is okay for this protection or another for another protection.
Think about that.

With your answer, new copyprotection (how starforce 3.x and safedisc 3.2x, securom 5.x) will be not copyable in near future with this large hardware-offers on the world. Only specified burners/readers would be working in conjunction with updating burning-software at this present.

Badly, i thought, Alcohol updates their products for new copyprotections in normal periods (1-2 months) also when not yet compatible with all burners/readers on the world.

#8 zamiel

zamiel

    Forum Support

  • Administration
  • 8,841 posts

Posted 19 July 2004 - 12:47 PM

The profiles are still needed for those of us who can use emulation once the blacklists are solved. For those who do not have the sufficient hardware, this is a workable solution.

#9 Jito463

Jito463

    Forum Support

  • Support Team
  • 5,625 posts

Posted 19 July 2004 - 01:53 PM

Also, take note of the fact that those Plex copies are not perfect. I forgot to mention this in my last post. The main reason Alcohol's dev team is not devoting their time to it currently is because it's not guaranteed to work. So why work towards something that will only work for a few customers with specific drives, and even then only some of the time? As Zamiel said, emulation works once the blacklists are resolved, so it is possible to copy SF3 using Alcohol with emulation, they just have to solve the BL problem. Then this would be a solution for the majority.

#10 Profi

Profi

    10% Member

  • +Alcohol-Customer
  • 10 posts

Posted 19 July 2004 - 03:28 PM

QUOTE
As Zamiel said, emulation works once the blacklists are resolved, so it is possible to copy SF3 using Alcohol with emulation, they just have to solve the BL problem. Then this would be a solution for the majority.


okay. Would be nice, when starforce can be emulated with any software. But when? next month? next year? blacklisted by copy-protector are very slow. alcohol can do faster this fix as copy-protector can refused.

eg. 20 games are released with starforce 3.3x (blacklist actual alcoholversion), you can now release a new emulationversion and fix this 20 games in this moment. Where are the problem for so slowly reaction from alcohol about emulations?


Please do something and help us with this starforce-problem. thx. rolleyes.gif

Edited by Profi, 19 July 2004 - 03:34 PM.


#11 Painkiller

Painkiller

    1% Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts

Posted 20 July 2004 - 07:31 PM

Yeah it would be really good if something could be done to bypass this shitty Starforce protection.

I wish all you guys at Alcohol luck with bypassing this ######.

Best Wishes

David aka Painkiller

#12 jcei

jcei

    1% Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

Posted 04 August 2004 - 04:16 PM

Hi,
Does someone know how SF 3.3x recognize virtual drives ?
I suppose it's more than a simple blacklist.

#13 zamiel

zamiel

    Forum Support

  • Administration
  • 8,841 posts

Posted 05 August 2004 - 06:41 AM

QUOTE (jcei @ Aug 4 2004, 05:28 PM)
Hi,
Does someone know how SF 3.3x recognize virtual drives ?
I suppose it's more than a simple blacklist.

Yes, that version at the moment recognises Virtual Drives. It is being worked on.

#14 jcei

jcei

    1% Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

Posted 05 August 2004 - 10:13 AM

QUOTE (zamiel @ Aug 5 2004, 07:53 AM)
QUOTE (jcei @ Aug 4 2004, 05:28 PM)
Hi,
Does someone know how SF 3.3x recognize virtual drives ?
I suppose it's more than a simple blacklist.

Yes, that version at the moment recognises Virtual Drives. It is being worked on.

Thx for the info.

But do you know how SF3 do recognize them ?
Seems to be an universal technique not depending on files or drivers names.

#15 Jito463

Jito463

    Forum Support

  • Support Team
  • 5,625 posts

Posted 05 August 2004 - 05:59 PM

Well, that's what takes so long to fix these blacklists. They have to find out *how* it's being detected, and then find a way to avoid the detection.

#16 Fyrez

Fyrez

    10% Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 30 posts

Posted 09 August 2004 - 08:36 PM

Need SF3 support !!!!!!!!! Without physical Cd-rom unplug.

Dear creators of Alcohol, create SF3 support please.....




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users