PDA

View Full Version : EQ2 Hacks



Acid1789
02-01-2005, 08:45 AM
Hi everyone,

Im considering a couple of projects for eq2, but not sure if either is worth my time.

The first is a showeq type application. A map display with entity information etc.

The second would be a clone of the eq2 client. Lower technical requirements than the eq2 client, less memory/cpu overhead as well. It would also have some bot functionality built directly into the client. And maybe some showeq type features.

If I write either or both of these, I would probably release them using a subscription based model. I would need to do this to support servers for some of the features I would like to implement. However, I might release a one time payment or possibly even free version without any of the dynamic support.

What do you guys think?

Acid1789

m0rbol
02-01-2005, 10:24 PM
Hi acid,

I think that would be a very cool program indeed, although would likely take a considerable amount of time to code (at least doing so solo).

The main problem I could see with a subscription based model, especially if you live in the US, is that you are facing a possible lawsuit from SOE. Sony doesn't like people undermining their cash cows - especially if they are profiting from it. Although, I will say I have seen the subscription thing work for Lineage 2. The bot, Lin2Rich, appeared to be profitable for the author (Paul Chen) who lives in China, where US lawyars couldn't pursue him easily.

Besides, we would all like you that much more if you released it free! :)

-m

Acid1789
02-02-2005, 12:36 AM
I actually discussed this with my attorney before posting anything about it (mostly about what ideas not to mention). He said that I wouldnt be infringing on sony's territory at all. The client app would only help their sales since you still would have to have an eq2 account. The showeq type application would probably piss them off and the only thing the could really successfully sue me for is loss of revenue. If they could prove that my application was interfering with their revenue stream. Of course Im also making the assumption that Im not using any tradmarked/copyrighted material.

As to the free approach, like you said there is a considerable amount of time involved in either project. Not much incentive to make it free ;)

Acid1789

Tor K'tal
02-02-2005, 05:48 AM
I see the point of a lot of effort being required to do it solo. It almost seems like too much for one person to do (as far as the slimmed down client). But with people already paying to play EQ/EQ2/SOE stuff, why would they want to pay more?

What is the potential of SOE stealling your stuff and releasing their own version of it, then even if you were charging they could cut you out (alla EQPlayNice... fact is that feature should have been incorperated into EQ many years earlier along with windowing).

Not saying it's a bad idea, just trying to suggest some more things to think about.

~ TK

Alethal
02-02-2005, 05:57 AM
Also you might not be the only one the "SEQ" clone market. With all the work that has already been done on SEQ, it would be a pity to write something from scratch.

It's likely possible to create a SEQ2 without all the work that was made with SEQ by taking some of the former code. Since SEQ is GPL'd, SEQ2 will have to be GPL'd too. I know it's theorically possible to *sell* GPL'd code but I don't see how you could run anything like that in this case. Better count on donations if you want to keep up with the website fees.

As for the BOT, I doubt anyone will take the time to write an open-source version of this.

a-1
02-02-2005, 04:07 PM
Acid1789 thanks for taking the time to code, research, share what you've learned and ask for feedback!

In my opinion most of the models used for creation/distribution of such programs are broken and unsafe for the users. There is much room for growth and profit here. The developer(s) have room to profit for their work and the users have room to profit from increased safety/usefullness.

The best model for safety/usefullness was the early version of SEQ. I LOVED SEQ, too bad EQ1 is a shithole of a game. It wasn't rampant enough that Sony cared..it didn't wreck game balance because the few who used it cared more about the use than trying to exploit their way to riches. Unfortunately this didn't last, partially IMO from the coders not being compensated fairly. If you had the skillset enough to set it up then you probably had the personality type that didn't want to pay for it. They kinda go hand-in-hand. It may not be a main motivation, but ya need money to live and no one likes working for free, you start feeling unappreciated.

MySEQ...EQII beta and production have been out a long time. First they had someone run off with their donations, now they accept them but haven't produced a thing. They say they will create and support for many things, EQII and WoW being on the list, but college and other priorities cause months to dissapear with zero to show. Their distribution model will have people getting banned for usage eventually anyhow.

Tault.com, XUnleashed, yadda yadda yadda. Pay subscriptions are great, especially when you have a sharing community that you aren't selective about. How long do these users really think it will be until SOE bans them? As a dev all I need is a subscription to these to keep track of and fix shit that can break my game. If it on this site and can break the game I know it is too widespread already and needs addressed. As far as I am concerned these sites exist solely to weed the script kiddies and people wanting to get into hacking from the rest of the pool AND line the pockets of people not really coding. They code, but not *really*.

There is a market to be had by an appreciative audience then. Hell, keep the pool small and selective and charge $100/copy for all I care for instance. I would gladly pay it. I want something that I don't have to worry about being a big enough splash that SOE will allocate labor to trace/fix it. I want something that the devs will support...I don't WANT to support it because then I would have the code. If I had the code then others that would have the code could post it and I would have to worry about it getting out (like the FH boards had happen).

Nope, charging for it is fine, you deserve it for the effort. Wanna make a 1-off and just support the release for a short time? Sure! Wanna make it a subscription service? Great! I submit that you can be compensated by the same ammount by being selective rather than widespread and just charge more. You help yourself by thereby limiting the ammount of support needed and help the user by it not being as widespread. I still think making it hard to implement is a great way of limiting the sharing, but that requires willingness to support as well.

As far as legality issues, I have researched a proverbial ass-load (hrm, I hope that isn't Freudian) of material on everything from Online (MMORPG) Economies to Sociology studies to Online Gaming Precidents both here and in Korea. This doesn't make me an expert but at least educated...anyway...the only thing I am aware of that would get you in possible legal hassle is making a Item/cash duper. From a simple labor/cash standpoint SOE will take on the several item/cash duping/producing sweatshops before bothering you. Also the auction sites. They will simply always have a bigger impact on the game balance/economy than you will. Other than that you are providing visual or gameplay resources that aren't made for only one (malicious) purpose.

Either way, as a user, if I could believe your app(s) were safe to use (well within reason), I would buy it and love it. Can you tell I'm longwinded? :)

m0rbol
02-02-2005, 11:58 PM
As to the free approach, like you said there is a considerable amount of time involved in either project. Not much incentive to make it free ;)

Acid1789Sure, there isn't much incentive to release it for free if your the only one doing work on it and everyone else is getting the "fruit of your labor." However, that would be the point of releaseing it OS in the first place, getting support from other developers. Reminds me of a quote I heard in my engineering class lecture, "The lone genius is always beat out by the organized chaos of a team." Where in this case, the team would be the developers over at sony who have plenty of resources to thwart against you and change encryption schemes 30 times a day if they please.


Let me ask you something, Acid, how long did it take to reverse engineer the protocol up to what you have now and write the code that was posted in your other thread? I imagine it wasn't an easy task by any means. Seems like an awful lot of code to work on by yourself. Even if you do not release any part of it open source, I'd suggest you have a team of private developers && || reverse engineers. I imagine there are people in these forums along with other related ones (although probably not tault they are a bunch of whining kiddies :P) who'd be willing to join your team.

Oh and as far as the bot code goes, I do *not* recommend you release that code. There are already plenty of 3rd-world country farmers ruining other mmo's as we speak, they don't need a helping hand into this one.

Freakyuno
02-03-2005, 01:23 PM
Where in this case, the team would be the developers over at sony who have plenty of resources to thwart against you and change encryption schemes 30 times a day if they please.


Having to wade through epic proportions of speculation in this thread, makes this quote that much more refreshing.

At least 1 person see's it for what it is. You want to charge for something that ultimatly you have no control over.

If you want a good business model, give away your product in the spirit of all that is Linux, sell your support.

Acid1789
02-03-2005, 01:40 PM
Having to wade through epic proportions of speculation in this thread, makes this quote that much more refreshing.

At least 1 person see's it for what it is. You want to charge for something that ultimatly you have no control over.

If you want a good business model, give away your product in the spirit of all that is Linux, sell your support.
First of all, I wouldnt be charging for something that i didnt have control over. I would be charging to ensure that I did have control. My approaches are not dependant on unstable flaws in sony's code. They do however require maintainance to keep up with sony changes. By charging for my software, I can either afford to support it myself, or I can hire people to do the work.

As for your remark about linux being a good business model, you need to go to business school. Free does not make money. And I could care less about the spirit of linux, I most likely wouldnt even support linux (unless a large number of customers wanted a linux version).

Acid1789

int 21h
02-03-2005, 04:22 PM
It seems for the most part a SEQ2 wouldn't really even provide that much of an advantage. Take for instance, question mark spawns, like resource node spawns, they're based upon LOS, but their activate radius is very very small, i.e. someone, either you or someone else has to walk near them before they even come up.

But even dismissing the usability aspect of it, if you think this is legal, or that you have any legal foot to stand on, you're completely mistaken.

First, the encryption of the Sony packets: Under the DMCA, it is illegal to reverse engineer (which you have already done to obtain the RC4 key) any encryption on a digital device.

Secondly, under the EULA for EQ2, Sony specifically prohibits the interfacing behavior you're concocting. In Blizzard vs. BnetD, it was found that EULAs are binding enough to waive FairUse rights in a product.

Finally, this is an entirely different studio than the EQ1 guys, so any assumptions in the past of what was koshure based on SEQ are out the window. They aren't going to stand idly by and let you do this, especially once you try to develop a business model around it.

I'm all for exploring things and tinkering (as evidenced by my interest in the packet sniffer), but I'm certainly not in favor of what you're suggesting, and I hardly think SOE will be either.

Also, your comments about business school are humorous at best. Check out IBM's business model, they give out free software, and they rake in billions in consulting solutions that utilize that free software.

Spaz
02-04-2005, 10:21 AM
This thread is funny. :)

int 21h is pretty much right on.

I'm thinking your attorney doesn't work with intellectual property much. There are many law firms that do and they're not hard to find.

One area you might make money from: Go forward with your project and when SOE sues you and shuts you down, turn around and sue your attorney for malpractice/malfeasance.

a-1
02-04-2005, 11:07 AM
int 21h and Spaz are way off base. There have been both International and now national precidents set ruling for the end user in gaming suits. Sony was afraid of this and that is WHY they didn't persue it in EQ1. Both of you are speaking from assumption. Please point out the last time a suit was in the developers favor in an MMORPG. They freakin settle at the drop of a hat. The first time Sony tried scared the shit out of them. You can NOT sign away any of your rights just because a EULA is written really scary.

Almost every suit brought by an MMORPG to court has LOST. From NCSOFT suing that Korean kid in their game RED MOON, then getting countersued and LOSING badly, to VERANT/SONY suing Playerauctions (suit lasted over a year) and LOSING...they just don't have the rights they try to convince you. They state they do and get proved wrong again and again. What they do have control over is banning you. Making a program that mods their game is no more illegal than someone making a plugin mod for Counterstrike or something.

YOU AREN'T DOING ANYTHING TO THEIR SERVERS. Nor are you spying on the traffic they are sending to a different user. So no law broken. As far as the courts have said so far, if they send it to you as a SERVICE then they are setting themselves up for it for, you see, THEY CONTROL the model they use, not us. They don't like the rules they set in game, they can code arround them or change them. All of this is up to them...but they are all self imposed.

Now go ahead, argue that you are smarter, argue that you "know the law", but until I see a precident, forget ever convincing me. I play by the rules of reality, not conjecture.

And Mr. Linux model lover, I love the development advancement that model provides. What it does not provide is a stable product without someone doing a lot of management. It also doesn't provide security for the users. Open source means copied and modded everywhere, which in turn means EVERYONE has/uses it and Sony guards against if faster/at all...why? Because SO many users having it disturbs game balance.

a-1
02-04-2005, 11:29 AM
Also, not that this thread should be derailed to this but since it has been incorrectly applied...Blizzard v. BNETD does NOT apply to this situation for many arguable reasons.

I assume the precident you are referring to in that suit being won was the clause:

"The defendants in this case waived their "fair use" right to reverse engineer by agreeing to the licensing agreement. Parties may waive their statutory rights under law in a contract."

The summary judgement also states "As it stands, the lower court's decision makes it unlawful in most cases to reverse engineer any commercial software program, thus making it impossible to create new programs that interoperate with older ones." and is still under appeal. However, we are talking a mod, not the whole program.

1st of all, this is over an emulator where they "stoled" the devs intellectual property and reformed the whole damn thing and marketed it for free. Not a mod interface or mod for the original software, but a whole emulator.

2nd, it was software that you had to sign their EULA to get the download the software, in that EULA was the reverse engineering clause that only applied BECAUSE they ripped the WHOLE GAME. It is a valid argument that you can reverse engineer parts needed of EQ2 without ever signing the EULA (even if it applied the same).


As for usablility then great, don't use it. Peronally I would find it handy. Tracking range bubble is 1000m I think in EQ2 which means it would show stuff that a range can track for pretty far away. Your bubble shows things WAY before your max LOS will show it onscreen. Tracking is not near the only use for such mods though.

int 21h
02-04-2005, 03:50 PM
The second would be a clone of the eq2 client. Lower technical requirements than the eq2 client, less memory/cpu overhead as well. It would also have some bot functionality built directly into the client. And maybe some showeq type features.
Hrm, that sure sounds like an entire program to me. In fact, it even sounds like an 'emulator' of the interface that players currently use to connect to the Sony Servers.

This is exactly the same thing as the Blizzard vs. BnetD case, except reversed, now the development being pursued is the client instead of the server.

You have to start the client to listen to packets. You have to agree to the EULA to start the client. Maybe I am taking things too fast here for you...

Its foolhardy to think any US based enterprise attempting this sort of arrangement would have any legal footing to stand on. The DMCA clearly states that breaking any encryption is illegal, no matter if the encryption is a simple cipher (like CSS) or a strong encryption like RC4. There current legal environment in the US is very strongly favoring content owners.

But, hey, don't take my word for it, drop an email to the EFF and see what they say :)

Acid1789
02-04-2005, 08:06 PM
Hrm, that sure sounds like an entire program to me. In fact, it even sounds like an 'emulator' of the interface that players currently use to connect to the Sony Servers.

This is exactly the same thing as the Blizzard vs. BnetD case, except reversed, now the development being pursued is the client instead of the server.
a-1 is right. It is not anything like the Blizzard vs BnetD case. BnetD is a server emulator, designed to take money away from Blizzard. A client clone (not emulator) would not hinder sony's revenue stream, infact it would most likely bolster it.

As for your remarks about reverse engineering being against the EULA, yes it is. Everything is against their EULA if you look at it close enough. Bottom line, they can ban you from their game for any reason they want. Thats not really the issue though. An EULA is not grounds for winning a lawsuit against a company selling tools or modifications to your program. They would need more than just an EULA to win a case against a client. It would be much easier for them to make development of the client much harder than it would be to beat it in court.

However it could be argued that a non sony client could be considered unauthorized access. In which case, anyone using it could possibly face prison time. That is a very grey area though, its not really much different from your laptop connecting to an open wireless network as you drive by. It remains to be seen what the courts actually do about accessing open networks. It could also be argued that eq2 servers are open to the public using the connection method the eq2 client uses. Basicly, if sony said that another client was accessing their servers illegally, it would be up to a judge to decide if there was a difference between the two clients and their access to the server.

Realisticly, If Sony sees it as a problem, the will approach me about it before filing suit. Either asking me to change things about it they dont like, or to stop its support/production completely. If I were to refuse this, then they would file suit.

A separate client that requires its users to still pay sony their subscription fee, I dont see them having a problem with. The things I do see them having a problem with are cheat like features or possible support issues on their end. This would be very similar to the linux client for UO. A separate unofficial 3rd party client.

So far, I am very pleased with this thread. There have been alot of good points made :)

Acid1789

int 21h
02-04-2005, 09:02 PM
They do have more than the EULA. They have the RC5 encryption they use to protect their intellectual property. You bypassing the encryption is a violation of the DMCA.

When I approached Sony about this particular discussion, the developers said they would forward the thread to the legal department but would not make comment on it.

int 21h
02-04-2005, 09:10 PM
Oh and as far as accessing open networks, in most states there are provisions to charge you under 'Theft of Telecommunications', however, if you're using that access to conduct illegal activities (like this (http://management.silicon.com/government/0,39024677,39126633,00.htm) or this (http://news.com.com/Wardriving+conviction+is+first+under+Can-Spam/2100-7351_3-5390722.html) ) they usually charge you with the activity that you're doing in conjunction with the theft or sometimes other trumped up felonies, and then drop the trumped up stuff in exchange for a guilty plea.

Cryonic
02-05-2005, 01:04 AM
Just and FYI. Bnetd did not take money from Blizzard. Battle.net is a free service that they offer to users of their games to allow them to play with others on the Net. Saying that it took money from them is like saying playing a game of theirs on your network took money from them, yet that feature is also present in their games. What they claimed in their case was that Battle.net was a Copy control mechanism and so was something protected by the DMCA.

Just keep one thing in mind, here in the old USA, anyone can sue anyone else for any reason. What you should ask yourself: Is this worth paying a lawyer to defend me if Sony decides to come after me. If it isn't, don't release anything. If it is, choose how you will release it and go from their. If you release binary only, pay to access software, so be it. That is your choice. Just be aware that people who pay money for something expect something in return (even if some of their demands are unreasonable).

Hell, people demand shit even when they get it for free. Just read through the archive of the helpdesk forums...

a-1
02-07-2005, 12:35 PM
There is a difference between emulating a server with content that they had to pay to create, and creating a different client to use their content on. You pay for the content, but they already allow you to change your UI.

Are you going to try to tell me that they are going to try to sue me for using a UI they don't like? Nope. What about if I use a different client then, is that unauthrized access? Nope. They may try scare tactics over that though, depends on how widespread it got and what you could do with it.

Eve they are wise they will take note from Eve Online and similar MMORPGS that allow a high level of customization and reading of server-side data for the community projects.

Don't forget that even if they DID have a precident to stand on, they have to PROVE that you were the one who reverse engineered something, not just produced some programs based on that information. Think about it...EVEN IF it would be held up in court, good luck proving the which keyboard did it let alone which person was at the keyboard at the time. There is a reason why you don't hear about persecution along these lines more often, it goes on often enough.

I bought the use of their content and the right to connect to their servers. Viewing their content that they are PUSHING TO YOU (even in a way they may not approve of) is not hacking their servers or account databases. You are only connecting via the account information they gave you since you paid them, therefor not unauthorized.

Besides, half the fun is that they don't want you to do it. It is the difference of position. I think if they code a product and allow me subscription then I should be allowed to use their product any way I can think of (without causing harm to others). I WANT AN ADVANTAGE. I like it. It makes me feel good. I like immediate gratification too.

What I don't like is taking 3 hours just to find out if a single raid mob is up or not and if so coordinate 24 people to go raid it, etc. etc. etc.

If they don't like it they can code around it. OF COURSE they only want everyone to use it like they intend, but honestly, if you are still paying them...you don't be a dick to anyone in game thereby ruining their experience...and you enjoy the game more...then what is the real issue? Two issues...they don't like lack of control and some people that can be dicks once given the power, are dicks (guy who emulated being Vyzydra The Cursed[sp?] in EQ1 anyone?). I have a problem with the latter issue of course, but not the former.

The reality is with a relitively small set of users, they find out you are doing something naughty, they ban that acct., they do analysis on how many probably can do it and how widespread it is, they try to code a fix if it's too impactful. That "too impactful" line is delicate and the real trick to the game. I find it ironic that the very premise being preached for not creating this...is on a ... SEQ board...?

Get in the spirit of things :P

Freakyuno
02-07-2005, 07:40 PM
Are you going to try to tell me that they are going to try to sue me for using a UI they don't like? Nope. What about if I use a different client then, is that unauthrized access? Nope. They may try scare tactics over that though, depends on how widespread it got and what you could do with it.

They are going to sue who ever is getting paid for the work. Guess what, if someone knocks off a bank, and hands you 10 grand in marked bills, I wonder who's going to jail when you try to spend them, you probably wont stay there, but it's going to cost you a bundle to prove you didnt.


If they don't like it they can code around it. OF COURSE they only want everyone to use it like they intend, but honestly, if you are still paying them...you don't be a dick to anyone in game thereby ruining their experience...and you enjoy the game more...then what is the real issue? Two issues...they don't like lack of control and some people that can be dicks once given the power, are dicks (guy who emulated being Vyzydra The Cursed[sp?] in EQ1 anyone?). I have a problem with the latter issue of course, but not the former.

Thanks for proving my very first point. He has no control over their servers, their code, their encryption, their patches...and a million other things. As soon as people start paying for a product, and Sony decides to code around a "problem" he has nothing but a bunch of peoples money.

a-1
02-08-2005, 04:03 PM
Your innaccurate analogy shows that you are missing the point of what you quoted. They can sue whoever they want when they want. The points you quoted were 1) You are allowed to customize your UI thereby providing some leeway 2) it is NOT "unauthorized access" by any possible stretch of the term and 3) flying under the radar is the safest way.

You basically responded to it by basically saying "Well if you do something they don't like they can make it a big bad hassle and umm...even if you don't end up in trouble it will be a umm...hassle."

Umm...ok..I ...agree? Ever hear that control is an illusion? You can't control whether they try to track you and hassle you or not. I am not suggesting you can. I am suggesting that operating in a sensible manner is what you do, period. That you can control.

As for your first point, it was weak. Your premise is that if we pay him money we are setting ourselves up for being ripped off. Welcome to life. You are trusting some level of support whether money is involved or not. As for Sony changes, that is what support is for. They are faced with much more labor(read risk) to change anything than Acid or anyone else to fix their apps. How do you think SEQ survived to begin with? By centralizing shit that changes. Variables. No big deal.

Prowling1
02-22-2005, 06:32 PM
I dont know about anyone else but here are 2 people that would spend 20-25$ for an App like that. Hope you luck and there is a big market for SEQ2.

-Prowling1

Spaz
02-23-2005, 04:05 PM
Do any of these settled lawsuits have to do with people who charged for the product that was used, though?

The BnetD thing was entirely free, wasn't it? Maybe it should not, but it seems to put a different spin on it when you are profiting from someone else's work in this way, rather than offering it for free.

I'm also not convinced that such a client would help Sony's product sales, since it could (I don't play EQ2) benefit the users of the modified client but at the expense of the unmodified client users.

You can't argue that someone using SEQ to find Quillmane doesn't have a significant advantage over someone not using SEQ to find Quillmane.

Cryonic
02-23-2005, 07:30 PM
Have an advantage, yes. One that fully benefits them in game, no. With SEQ you can see that the mob is up (or not) and where they are, but that doesn't help you actually kill the mob. A level 30 mob will still slaughter your level 10 even if you are using SEQ, heheh.

Walpurgiss
02-24-2005, 01:52 AM
I wonder if anyone has gotten a C&D for using wget on SOE's patchers.

Spaz
02-24-2005, 09:53 AM
Had dinner with one of the attorneys here that works (lightly) with IP last night. His take on this was interesting. He felt that Sony could action almost any aspect of it but likely would only go after a person doing this for license violations because that's an area that they would have a higher chance of success. He touched on the issue that revenue earned from sales of the modified client would probably not be nearly sufficient to pay for a legal defense, so they can be a bully here, right or wrong.

This was based on the assumption that the monthly subscription amounts to a license to use the software as opposed to an outright purchase of it.

I'm tempted to ask one of our new attorneys to research this as a training excersize.

throx
02-25-2005, 10:44 PM
At the very least, Sony would just ban everyone not using an official client (it's trivially easy to detect when you have control over updates/patching), because they can ban anyone they like for no particular reason if they want. The "right to connect to the server" simply is an illusion. I'm sure the author would get nailed with a C&D pretty quickly and if you have the money to fight Sony, good luck.