XBox 360 hacked already (allegedly)
 

Info here.

Didn't take long :o

Doesn't mean much though. It just mean that they've worked out the format of the data on the discs etc. That's a big step away from being able to run unsigned / copied code on the system.

It's just a shame that these obviously quite clever people can't put their talents to some more useful / legal / morally correct purpose... :(

Would / could be a benefit for those people that would like a larger 2.5" disk in their machine rather than the 20GB that's half swallowed up, once they work out how to migrate / setup a disk themselves. If / when I get one, I'd certainly like around 80GB of space so that it could actually be used properly as a media centre. That's a big if / when though as I don't see the console giving me any realy benefits over what I currently have at the moment :(

guide to adding an extra capacity hard drive on 360 is already available http://www.llamma.com/xbox360/mods/U...rive%20Mod.htm :norty:

Microsoft have always said that you would be able to upgrade the hard drive by yourself if you wanted to. That's why they didn't make that bit secure. All the security signing stuff is on chips inside the machine, (that's how it can still be secure without having a hd attached - i.e. core pack).

That's external though, I was talking about an internal one, tucked away ;)

So you can just put in any hard disk you want, i.e. swap the 20GB one out for an 80GB one? I'm assuming it's not quite that easy, else what is to stop people just buying 2.5" lappy disks off the shelf rather than Microsofts?

Because you need the container. I've heard you can swap the hard disc quite easily, but you can only get the housing for attaching it to the xbox by buying the original hd unit.

Ooh that sounds good then :) Shouldn't take long for some 3rd party containers to come out and then slap in your own disk. Do you think you'd need to transfer the system data over though from an original disk or is it stored on ROM chips and written to a new disk?

Still not convinced enough to get one yet ;)

Everything is stored on rom chips in the console itself. Otherwise, how would the core system work? :D

Doh! I thought it was all just magicky ;)

It's only a matter of time before it happens.

We all know it and Microsoft know it.

All security measures can be reversed, it's just a case of figuring them out

:)

What including 128bit encryption!!!! ;)

Regards,
Shaun.

360 games hacked – First mod-chip 'within weeks'

http://news.spong.com/x?art=9422

games were hacked on the day of release though..... will take some time longer to do the chip...... it has already been found out the security is way higher than the XBOX. Only time will tell.

No matter how many bits in the key there is enevitably some form of weakness in the algorithm used that can be exploited. Brute force (i.e. trying all 2^128 combinations) is not the only method! Some encryption techniques are better than others. Insider knowledge helps to ;)

All it takes to break encryption is time & CPU power -

And is it a wonder people want to hack it when games are £50 a hit? No game is worth £50 on any format - total rip off and one of the reasons I wasn't interested in getting a 360.

Brought PGR3 from my local Tescos for £44.99 yesterday.
Cheaper online.

Aye, but back in the day, computing was a far less commercialised industry in terms of software. Prices were more competetive, and generally there was more freedom for programmers in terms of platforms and hardware.

Now the corperate giants have swallowed up the little ones, and now control pricing to an extortioinate level.

Think of the rogue programmer as the person who's opertunity was snubbed by a giant who solely belives in making money and not good software, cutting costs on development and testing for sakes of the accountant's wishes. Restricting and preventing any "good" talented programmer from achieving their goals.

Hacking the xbox is a like a two finger "up-yours" to Microsoft ;)

Out of interest, why do you think it is a rip off? These games cost a great deal to develop, and you expect them to give them away?

Also, compare them to other forms of entertainment. Around here it costs about £7 to go to the cinema, for which you get (on average) about 2 hours entertainment. So a computer game (£40 if you buy them online), is the equivilent to about 6 trips to the flicks, or about 12 hours entertainment. Given that most decent games last 20+ hours, it seems pretty good value to me.

That has happened in some cases. However, in a lot of other cases the small companies have been forced to merge or go out of business because they can't afford to compete due to low software sales and high piracy rates.

Got PGR and PDZ for 37.97 each on Tesco.com :)

Not true,

how many times do you read reviews or interviews with the coders/ designers, and get the following..

we used the xx engine for the graphics, which we previously used in xx or xy game or we took the mk 1 graphics and tweaked them.

the initial one is the costly one, once a game house has done that, the rest is just tweaking an established format.

how many games have hit the shelves that are sub standard?? because the bean counters want returns..

every new film has a pc game or a tie in.. sorry very few films port well to computers..

ask ocean, there past masters!!


Mart :D:D

Well, I write software for a living, so I think I have a little bit of an idea of how much it costs.

Using an existing engine and tweaking it is often a costly business. You either have to use your own code which can be very expensive on resources, or you have to license another already existing engine, which is also very expensive.

plus bug fixing, adding new features, replacing code with quicker routines, making it work with the latest version of directx or the latest graphics drivers (if your've on the pc of course) etc etc....

That's got nothing to do with the amount it costs to develop a quality piece of software. I agree that people like EA shovel out remake after remake with little or no innovation, but I do not included these people in the list of makers of quality games.

Very true. But what has that got to do with anything. All I said was that compared to other forms of entertainment like going to the cinema or even spending an evening down the pub, games (even at £50) actually work out very good value for money when you work out the number of hours you get out of them.

Iain, I'd agree with that comment for RPGs. Everything else though tends to last me (probably) around 10 hours or so and I do feel a little let down that I've paid so much for a game that I may not go back to that has cost so much.

As a result, I now buy most of my games second hand when they have been through their boom period and are cheaper and plentiful.

I think that could be a personal thing though having played games for a little over 20 years I'm used to most genres. The RPG storylines and character building keep me interested moreso than the repetitive gameplay. It's hard to write something new and innovative these days which is why I find I'm playing games less and less :(

I've written a couple of (bad!) games in my time, although not commerically, and I'm well aware of ever expanding costs. Unfortunately, a lot of that appears to be on artwork and eye candy for nicer levels and the like, but still the same boggo gameplay. Take Tomb Raider for example, when it first came out, it was blinding, innovative, fun, etc. By the last installment it wasn't even worth buying as it was same old same old :(

Very true. I started by writing little games and software for the Dragon 32 / BBC micro and have been playing them ever since, so I know where you are coming from :)

All that's mostly down to personal preference. If you don't like a particular genre then spending that much on a game isn't going to be worth it. The same could be said for anything though. I'd never pay good money to go and watch a Hugh Grant film for example as I'd consider it a waste of money. Doesn't mean other people would think it good value though...

p.s. the next Tomb Raider game is being written by a different dev team, from scratch, and it supposed to be a lot more like the original game than the sequels, so hopefully it might be worth playing this time around ;)

The other thing to remember is that there is a lot of skimming of that £50 before you get to the real figure that gets paid to the developer.
The breakdown is slightly depressing for the people who actually make the games...

£25 to the retailer
£7-10 to the platform owners (M$/Sony)
£8 Mr Vat
£8 to the publisher and out of that the developer might get 4 quid if they are very lucky :(

Also films "entertain" for 2 hours but you don't get any interaction and thats the bit that costs a lot :)

Cheers

Dan

I would think it's down to the cost to produce V's revenue return.

How much would a game like Halo take to make? What did it make for Bungie?

If you compare them to the cost to make a film etc then the games will come in far lower.

The prices are as they are because that is the level they managed to set them at and the public will pay.

Cost 3.5 million reportedly and sold about 4 million units with them taking between 4-8 pounds per copy...

IIRC its only the top 3% of games that make a profit, don't know what the percentage is for general release films ?

Cheers

Dan