Rogue

Game requests go here.

Moderators: simonsunnyboy, Mug UK, Doctor Bob Gordon, ICS, Moderator Team

User avatar
Marakatti
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1303
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2005 9:58 am
Location: Finland
Contact:

Rogue

Postby Marakatti » Tue Jul 25, 2017 3:13 pm

Hi, it was reported that our dump of Rogue has failed the copy protection. Anyone with SuperCard Pro or Kryoflux who could try to reproduce the dump?

The version made with Pasti (or unsuccesful settings of its preferences) seems not to handle the protection correctly.

From Mobygames:

Copy protection
The commercial Rogue versions didn't fare too well, as lots of pirated copies existed. The later DOS versions were copy protected (starting at the latest with V1.48 published by Epyx), in an interesting way. You could actually play a pirated copy, but if you did, you suffered six times the normal damage from monster attacks -- which quickly ended an already pretty hard game, it was hard to even get to level two. On the tombstone, you could then read the evocative message:

REST IN PEACE

Software Pirate

killed by

Copy Protection Mafia

It appears to be the case on ST version aswell.

Cheers,
Marko
-------------< Member of Atarimania >-----------
-< ST / STe / Falcon030 / TT030 archiver >-
-------------> www.atarimania.com <-------------

Atarieterno
Captain Atari
Captain Atari
Posts: 256
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 3:40 pm
Location: Spain

Re: Rogue

Postby Atarieterno » Tue Jul 25, 2017 9:39 pm

A very original protection system, I did not know that increased difficulty for the piracy.
Thanks for the info and I hope someone makes that contribution.
ST/fm/e, STacy, Mega ST/e, TT, Falcon, C-Lab MKX... and more music tools.

AtariZoll
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Posts: 2759
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 4:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Rogue

Postby AtariZoll » Wed Jul 26, 2017 2:57 pm

It is AtariCrypt who discovered this issue . He explained it to me in e-mail yesterday, and I looked into. Obviously, another case of protection, with which Pasti can not deal properly. Actually, there is multiple level protection, so cracker may be fooled easily after removes first level. Concrete problem seems as not proper track read. Ijor should look into this. Or maybe already knows, just that info is not accessible.
I traced game code, and I think that I found solution. In attachment is corrected game executable. You just need to depack and copy it into game DIR, and run it instead org. ROGUE.PRG .
ROGUED2.ZIP

Game is not hard, it seems. Control method is little strange, but not bad at all.
If you want to playtest it, get the rest here : http://atari.8bitchip.info/ASTGA/R/rogue.php
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
English language is like bad boss on workplace: it expecting from you to strictly follow all, numerous rules, but self bending rules as much likes :mrgreen:

User avatar
dlfrsilver
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1388
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 1:41 am
Contact:

Re: Rogue

Postby dlfrsilver » Thu Jul 27, 2017 6:38 pm

Marakatti wrote:Hi, it was reported that our dump of Rogue has failed the copy protection. Anyone with SuperCard Pro or Kryoflux who could try to reproduce the dump?

The version made with Pasti (or unsuccesful settings of its preferences) seems not to handle the protection correctly.

From Mobygames:

Copy protection
The commercial Rogue versions didn't fare too well, as lots of pirated copies existed. The later DOS versions were copy protected (starting at the latest with V1.48 published by Epyx), in an interesting way. You could actually play a pirated copy, but if you did, you suffered six times the normal damage from monster attacks -- which quickly ended an already pretty hard game, it was hard to even get to level two. On the tombstone, you could then read the evocative message:

REST IN PEACE

Software Pirate

killed by

Copy Protection Mafia

It appears to be the case on ST version aswell.

Cheers,
Marko


Hi Marko,

Who imaged this game in Pasti ?
Now SPS France representative since the 19th of June 2014. Proud to be an SPS member !

User avatar
Marakatti
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1303
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2005 9:58 am
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: Rogue

Postby Marakatti » Thu Jul 27, 2017 7:27 pm

dlfrsilver wrote:
Hi Marko,

Who imaged this game in Pasti ?


Hi, unfortunately i have no idea :( The file was uploaded in 19th of January 2011 with no source.
-------------< Member of Atarimania >-----------
-< ST / STe / Falcon030 / TT030 archiver >-
-------------> www.atarimania.com <-------------

User avatar
Brume
Red eyes
Red eyes
Posts: 4072
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 10:16 am
Location: France
Contact:

Re: Rogue

Postby Brume » Thu Jul 27, 2017 10:07 pm

Kryoflux + SuperCard Pro dumps are here:
viewtopic.php?f=104&t=28003
Hope it can help.

User avatar
dlfrsilver
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1388
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 1:41 am
Contact:

Re: Rogue

Postby dlfrsilver » Thu Jul 27, 2017 10:52 pm

Brume wrote:Kryoflux + SuperCard Pro dumps are here:
viewtopic.php?f=104&t=28003
Hope it can help.


It does. The protection is located on track 79, it makes use of 11 sectors x 512 bytes. The last sector use an illegal sector number (111). This sector is checked 2 times by the program.

However, considering how clean is the dump, there's no explanation about the STX export problem. Aufit should be able to make a working STX file right from the start.

I have a fully working IPF out of your unmodified original. good job !
Now SPS France representative since the 19th of June 2014. Proud to be an SPS member !

AtariZoll
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Posts: 2759
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 4:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Rogue

Postby AtariZoll » Fri Jul 28, 2017 1:16 am

dlfrsilver wrote:
However, considering how clean is the dump, there's no explanation about the STX export problem. Aufit should be able to make a working STX file right from the start.
I

Ijor is informed about, so will look into when be able.
English language is like bad boss on workplace: it expecting from you to strictly follow all, numerous rules, but self bending rules as much likes :mrgreen:

AtariZoll
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Posts: 2759
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 4:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Rogue

Postby AtariZoll » Fri Jul 28, 2017 8:38 am

I tested that Brume's 5 rev SCP in Steem SSE, and it failed to pass copy protection - what would be Steem SSE error, I guess.
The protection self: crucial part is sector #111 on track #79 . It is with CRC error, so first condition is that reading TOS function (Xbios Eight) return there CRC error code. But after that comes real protection: key value is generated using what is read from that sector with CRC error. And then it is used by gameplay, in fight - that part was easy to trace down. And it's not proper one generated with current Pasti, and not ...
So, Pasti does not handle this CRC error correct, it seems, or just old STX image is not good in that part. Conversion from SCP to STX produces not good enough image of that sector. Steem SSE emulates not properly it. All this assuming that SCP image is really OK. Can we see that IPF file dlfrsilver ?
I'm sorry, but "fully working' is now not something what convinces me. Played it until death, and did not get Pirate scum txt ?
Btw. there are 2 illegal sector numbers: 22 and 111 .
Last edited by AtariZoll on Fri Jul 28, 2017 4:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
English language is like bad boss on workplace: it expecting from you to strictly follow all, numerous rules, but self bending rules as much likes :mrgreen:

User avatar
dlfrsilver
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1388
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 1:41 am
Contact:

Re: Rogue

Postby dlfrsilver » Fri Jul 28, 2017 3:22 pm

Well there is a test to be done, i have died in the game and i got the pirate scum message on my tombstone.

So, basically quite a few test have to be done here :

1) test the game on a real STF (on STE, you get a blit error).

2) check carefully that steem doesn't have any trouble to process the protection.

2) because the protection as it stands is supported by the CTA. When a protection is not supported, the CTA shows it. It indicates something like 90,98%. Here the protection track is perfectly recognized.....

EDIT : OK, the protection used is american :) It's the HLS disk protection.

EDIT 2 : the concerned sectors for protection are sector 111 and 9.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by dlfrsilver on Fri Jul 28, 2017 3:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Now SPS France representative since the 19th of June 2014. Proud to be an SPS member !

ijor
Hardware Guru
Hardware Guru
Posts: 3023
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 7:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Rogue

Postby ijor » Fri Jul 28, 2017 3:43 pm

I'm currently out of home. Will check it next week. In the meantime, if somebody has a Pasti STX image made directly on a real ST (not converted from RAW images), it might be helpful.

User avatar
Marakatti
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1303
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2005 9:58 am
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: Rogue

Postby Marakatti » Fri Jul 28, 2017 4:05 pm

ijor wrote:I'm currently out of home. Will check it next week. In the meantime, if somebody has a Pasti STX image made directly on a real ST (not converted from RAW images), it might be helpful.

As far as i know this one is made with real ST in 2010/2011.

Brume wrote:Kryoflux + SuperCard Pro dumps are here:
viewtopic.php?f=104&t=28003
Hope it can help.

Many thanks Brume :) I'll wait a bit where this analysis is going.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
-------------< Member of Atarimania >-----------
-< ST / STe / Falcon030 / TT030 archiver >-
-------------> www.atarimania.com <-------------

AtariZoll
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Posts: 2759
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 4:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Rogue

Postby AtariZoll » Fri Jul 28, 2017 4:07 pm

1 image is here: http://atari.8bitchip.info/ASTGA/R/rogue.php
And another one:
Rogue_o.zip

One of them is from Atarimania for sure (now removed) . And both are from times before SCP, Aufit.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
English language is like bad boss on workplace: it expecting from you to strictly follow all, numerous rules, but self bending rules as much likes :mrgreen:

User avatar
dlfrsilver
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1388
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 1:41 am
Contact:

Re: Rogue

Postby dlfrsilver » Sat Jul 29, 2017 10:09 am

oh this a date in the Herndon HLS track. 23-03-1986 :) so this revision is 23 march 1986.
Now SPS France representative since the 19th of June 2014. Proud to be an SPS member !

User avatar
leech
Atari Super Hero
Atari Super Hero
Posts: 851
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2015 3:26 pm

Re: Rogue

Postby leech » Tue Aug 01, 2017 10:55 pm

This is a look for an original Rogue dump right? I am pretty sure I have a hacked version that didn't say I was a pirate scum, although for all I know it still did double damage, that game is hard!
Atari 8Bits: 800xl, 600xl, XEGS, 800, 130xe, 130xe (fully upgraded (soon!))
Atari STs: 1040STf (broken shifter), 1040STe, Mega STe, TT030, Falcon (CT60e, SuperVidel)

ijor
Hardware Guru
Hardware Guru
Posts: 3023
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 7:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Rogue

Postby ijor » Thu Aug 03, 2017 5:05 pm

Short answer: Bad protection implementation, it needs TOS 1.0

Will elaborate later, but the original image at Atarimania seems good. Didn't test the others yet, but probably they are ok. Tested with TOS 1.0 US and 512K RAM. But probably runs ok with any TOS 1.0 and with 1MB RAM as well.

Will elaborate later, because it's interesting why it requires TOS 1.0. It depends on a TOS bug that was fixed in later revisions ...

AtariZoll
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Posts: 2759
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 4:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Rogue

Postby AtariZoll » Thu Aug 03, 2017 6:03 pm

ijor wrote:Short answer: Bad protection implementation, it needs TOS 1.0

Will elaborate later, but the original image at Atarimania seems good. Didn't test the others yet, but probably they are ok. Tested with TOS 1.0 US and 512K RAM. But probably runs ok with any TOS 1.0 and with 1MB RAM as well.

Will elaborate later, because it's interesting why it requires TOS 1.0. It depends on a TOS bug that was fixed in later revisions ...


So, this is because TOS 1.00 XBIOS 8 function implementation gives different return value in d0 in case of CRC error - at least in some circumstances.
I tested with 1.02, did not see need for 1.00 too :D
English language is like bad boss on workplace: it expecting from you to strictly follow all, numerous rules, but self bending rules as much likes :mrgreen:

User avatar
dlfrsilver
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1388
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 1:41 am
Contact:

Re: Rogue

Postby dlfrsilver » Fri Aug 04, 2017 4:14 am

ijor wrote:Short answer: Bad protection implementation, it needs TOS 1.0

Will elaborate later, but the original image at Atarimania seems good. Didn't test the others yet, but probably they are ok. Tested with TOS 1.0 US and 512K RAM. But probably runs ok with any TOS 1.0 and with 1MB RAM as well.

Will elaborate later, because it's interesting why it requires TOS 1.0. It depends on a TOS bug that was fixed in later revisions ...


Oh ok ! Well, it's an american game, good to know the HLS herndon protection requires TOS v1.00.
Now SPS France representative since the 19th of June 2014. Proud to be an SPS member !

User avatar
Marakatti
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1303
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2005 9:58 am
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: Rogue

Postby Marakatti » Fri Aug 04, 2017 7:28 am

ijor wrote:Short answer: Bad protection implementation, it needs TOS 1.0

Will elaborate later, but the original image at Atarimania seems good. Didn't test the others yet, but probably they are ok. Tested with TOS 1.0 US and 512K RAM. But probably runs ok with any TOS 1.0 and with 1MB RAM as well.

Will elaborate later, because it's interesting why it requires TOS 1.0. It depends on a TOS bug that was fixed in later revisions ...


Thanks for finding a solution :) I'll put the image online again. And thanks for all the others too :cheers:
-------------< Member of Atarimania >-----------
-< ST / STe / Falcon030 / TT030 archiver >-
-------------> www.atarimania.com <-------------

AtariZoll
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Posts: 2759
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 4:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Rogue

Postby AtariZoll » Fri Aug 04, 2017 10:17 am

Yes, STX images are OK. But needs Pasti.dll update, it seems. And SCP support in Steem SSE fails. With TOS 1.00 it just asks constantly for put disk in drive B, then A ... I hope Steven Seagal will see this ...
English language is like bad boss on workplace: it expecting from you to strictly follow all, numerous rules, but self bending rules as much likes :mrgreen:

ijor
Hardware Guru
Hardware Guru
Posts: 3023
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 7:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Rogue

Postby ijor » Sat Aug 05, 2017 12:44 am

AtariZoll wrote:So, this is because TOS 1.00 XBIOS 8 function implementation gives different return value in d0 in case of CRC error...


Yes, there is a bug in TOS 1.0 that reading a sector with CRC error might not return any error at all, as if the sector would be ok. This is related to how the FDC read multiple sectors work. Later TOS versions fixed the bug simply by not using the multiple read sector feature.

The protection does check specifically for a CRC error, but it actually expects the opposite result, that there is no CRC error. I guess during development they found out expecting a CRC error doesn't work, they didn't realize it was because of the TOS bug. Somehow they reversed the direction of the comparison that happened to work because of the bug. But of course, when using a later TOS version that doesn't have the bug, it will return a CRC error that the protection doesn't expect and the protection will fail.

dlfrsilver wrote:Oh ok ! Well, it's an american game, good to know the HLS herndon protection requires TOS v1.00.


Yes, but not every old US release requires TOS 1.0. Not even every HLS protected title. There are several HLS protections and variations, this seems to be a rather early one.

Marakatti wrote:Thanks for finding a solution :) I'll put the image online again. And thanks for all the others too :cheers:


Nice. But I would say that your wording on the Atarimania record is not accurate and it might be a bit misleading. It is not that the dump requires TOS 1.0, that suggests there is a problem with the dump. It is the game, or at least that version of the game, that requires TOS 1.0

The note on the Mastertronic budget release (http://www.atarimania.com/game-atari-st ... 21336.html) is also not accurate:

Download removed because the protection wasn't succesfully dumped.


As I'll comment later, that doesn't seem to be true, or at the very least we don't know that for sure. Seems the problem is with the release itself, not with the dump. Or do you tested the original disk in real hardware and you know it does work ok?

ijor
Hardware Guru
Hardware Guru
Posts: 3023
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 7:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Rogue

Postby ijor » Sat Aug 05, 2017 1:12 am

I happen to have a dump of the Mastertronic budget release, and it's pretty weird. According to my notes, I made the dump myself years ago from a shrink wrapped brand new package.

Seems the disk was mastered from a used copy. Something that was not that uncommon on budget releases. There are traces from a saved game, even when the file with the saved game was deleted. This deleted saved game is not present in the original Epyx retail release.

The protection itself seems to be created with a software copier trying to emulate the original HLS protection. As if the original disk would have been copied with a smart software copier, like Procopy. It possibly might work if it would have done correctly, but it doesn't and then the protection fails. But in this case, the game crashes. At least it crashes under Steem in the few tests I made.

It would be interesting if somebody else has another copy of this release. Marko, can you please post of PM the dump for the budget release you had at Atarimania.

AtariZoll
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Fuji Shaped Bastard
Posts: 2759
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 4:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Rogue

Postby AtariZoll » Sat Aug 05, 2017 7:50 am

Well, another argument for people claiming that only using originals and their faithful copies is the right way :D
English language is like bad boss on workplace: it expecting from you to strictly follow all, numerous rules, but self bending rules as much likes :mrgreen:

User avatar
Marakatti
Atari God
Atari God
Posts: 1303
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2005 9:58 am
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: Rogue

Postby Marakatti » Sat Aug 05, 2017 9:11 am

ijor wrote:Nice. But I would say that your wording on the Atarimania record is not accurate and it might be a bit misleading. It is not that the dump requires TOS 1.0, that suggests there is a problem with the dump. It is the game, or at least that version of the game, that requires TOS 1.0

The note on the Mastertronic budget release (http://www.atarimania.com/game-atari-st ... 21336.html) is also not accurate:

Download removed because the protection wasn't succesfully dumped.


As I'll comment later, that doesn't seem to be true, or at the very least we don't know that for sure. Seems the problem is with the release itself, not with the dump. Or do you tested the original disk in real hardware and you know it does work ok?


Ok, please tell me how to put it and i'll update the text. I'm not a coder or know nothing about disk protections so i don't know anything about what's happening "inside the disk".

If i write it requires TOS 1.0 i get reports that it works even though people won't play it enough to understand the protection gets activated with TOS 1.2 and greater.

I also wonder if the Mastertronic release is different...
-------------< Member of Atarimania >-----------
-< ST / STe / Falcon030 / TT030 archiver >-
-------------> www.atarimania.com <-------------

ijor
Hardware Guru
Hardware Guru
Posts: 3023
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 7:52 pm
Contact:

Re: Rogue

Postby ijor » Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:27 am

Marakatti wrote:Ok, please tell me how to put it and i'll update the text. I'm not a coder or know nothing about disk protections so i don't know anything about what's happening "inside the disk".

If i write it requires TOS 1.0 i get reports that it works even though people won't play it enough to understand the protection gets activated with TOS 1.2 and greater.


I'm not sure you understand my point. All I'm saying is to change the term "dump" for "release", because otherwise it might imply that the problem is specific to the dump and not to the disk/software/release.

Currently the record claims: "Dump only works correctly with TOS 1.0 due to a copy protection".
I suggest to change it to something like this: "The original release only works correctly with TOS 1.0 due to a copy protection".

I also wonder if the Mastertronic release is different...


It seems so according to a dump I have. And it looks like you have, or had, a Mastertronic dump. Did you read the other message I posted above? viewtopic.php?f=4&t=32007#p324104


Social Media

     

Return to “Games - Requests”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests