VBA-M

Tomato · Post by **Tomato** » Mon May 12, 2008 1:26 am

Just wanted to drop in and say you guys kick ass for all your hard work here. All the extra features/fixes/enhancements have made it a lot nicer to work on that dastardly Mother 3 stuff.

I do have one tiny question, and I suck when it comes to this open source kind of stuff, so forgive me if it's already posted somewhere (or if I shouldn't even be asking here), but might there be plans for UPS soft-patching? If it's too much trouble or whatever, don't mind me. Just curious, because I don't look forward to all the how-to-patch questions in a few months

Post by **Nach** » Mon May 12, 2008 1:42 am

I'll add it.

Tomato · Post by **Tomato** » Mon May 12, 2008 2:06 am

Really? That'd be awesome

I owe you one. If ever someday you need something translated into English from Japanese, just ask anytime.

franpa · Post by **franpa** » Mon May 12, 2008 3:45 am

How do you install the filters package? I tried with the latest MSVC2008 build by putting them all in the same folder as the EXE but it wont let me select them at all >.> so i cant use any pixel filters.

Deathlike2 · Post by **Deathlike2** » Mon May 12, 2008 4:21 am

franpa, if you read the thread, you would know the answer.

mudlord · Post by **mudlord** » Mon May 12, 2008 6:55 am

If ever someday you need something translated into English from Japanese, just ask anytime.

Hehehe, well we already have preliminary German and Spanish translations of the Qt4 GUI, so when its more mature, we could use some help for a Japanese translation.

Post by **Nach** » Mon May 12, 2008 11:46 am

Tomato wrote:Really? That'd be awesome I owe you one. If ever someday you need something translated into English from Japanese, just ask anytime.

Sure. I'd love to have EarthBound 2 translated

mudlord · Post by **mudlord** » Thu May 15, 2008 5:08 am

Never played the games to be honest. Still, it'll be awesome to try out your patch Tomato, as your previous SNES stuff rocks. =D

Tomato · Post by **Tomato** » Thu May 15, 2008 8:00 pm

Thanks

When I look back at my old stuff I'm actually not very happy with it, but I think this'll turn out much better now that I have years of pro experience under my belt.

As for EarthBound, it's probably not for everyone, and it's kind of almost too hyped-up nowadays. Even so, I recommend it if ever you want to play a laid-back, relaxing, goofy RPG. It's strangely kind of soothing.

Anyway, all that aside, thanks again guys for all your awesome work

Post by **Nach** » Thu May 15, 2008 8:32 pm

Tomato wrote: As for EarthBound, it's probably not for everyone, and it's kind of almost too hyped-up nowadays.

Didactically speaking, seminal evidence seems to explicate the fact that your repudiation of entropy supports my theory of space-time synthesis. Of this, I am irrefutably confident.

And you can't beat me, for I am the third strongest. And watch out for Ghost of Super Starman Deluxe Jr.

I don't know what you're thinking Tomato, but I absolutely loved EarthBound, why wouldn't I want to play EarthBound 2? Dungeon Man demands it!

PS. Tomato is a good kid, even though he sometimes wets his bed at night.

DEFIANT · Post by **DEFIANT** » Sun May 18, 2008 5:57 pm

Just curious but who are this guys?: http://www.freewebs.com/laterza/index.htm

Edit URL

mudlord · Post by **mudlord** » Sun May 18, 2008 10:35 pm

If you are referring to VBA-Cloud....

They are personally a bunch of thieving idiots. Ignore the bastards.

For lulz, read this: http://www.freewebs.com/laterza/index.htm

DEFIANT · Post by **DEFIANT** » Sun May 18, 2008 11:34 pm

What a bunch of assholes. What are they...Super Hackers lulz!!??

So why is it they think they can do a better job that what your team has already accomplished? How lame. They didn't even release the source code...Hiding how they stole it is my guess.

But if anyone asks, I'll be sure to give you guys full credit for all your hard work on the REAL VisualboyAdvance "revived" project. Thanks for all the hard work, it is appreciated.

neo_bahamut1985 · Post by **neo_bahamut1985** » Sun May 18, 2008 11:50 pm

Tch. Losers.

Post by **Nach** » Mon May 19, 2008 12:47 am

Anyone care to enlighten me what this VBA-Cloud thing is?

I see it says GPL, but there's no source. And what exactly is it? And this talk of protection?

BTW, if for any reason we wanted highly encrypted executables (I have no idea why though), I could whip up something, which would mean some code modification, and would make VBA slower, but on the other hand, it will kill every disassembler and debugger out there on it, and it won't be 'decrypted', any time soon.

I'd love to see this magical program which can find routines embedded in the program and somehow find and know how to decrypt AES tables of function pointers.

mudlord · Post by **mudlord** » Mon May 19, 2008 1:26 am

Anyone care to enlighten me what this VBA-Cloud thing is?

Its a lame hack of our work.

I see it says GPL, but there's no source. And what exactly is it? And this talk of protection?

Mainly something to slow thier attempts of ripping us off.

BTW, if for any reason we wanted highly encrypted executables (I have no idea why though), I could whip up something, which would mean some code modification, and would make VBA slower, but on the other hand, it will kill every disassembler and debugger out there on it, and it won't be 'decrypted', any time soon.

All we need, is just something to stop these noobs. Anything highly encrypted is not needed, since we are dealing with lamers here. We just need a PE protector to stop idiots from reshacking/altering the executable.

I already found a decent and fast protector, and its open source too. Though, I am open to your thoughts.

neo_bahamut1985 · Post by **neo_bahamut1985** » Mon May 19, 2008 1:26 am

Don't see the point of encrypting VBA-M; it's already perfect as it is. And adding protection would require extra, unecessary pain-in-the-butt programming (IMHO). I like it the way it is.

Post by **Nach** » Mon May 19, 2008 3:13 am

mudlord:

Regarding the program you sent me, I recommend not using that straight up.
I'd use my own variation on that which modifies the file somewhere in the middle, making it harder to locate. These types of programs normally don't do that, because they don't have the ability to keep a proper stream going with modifications smack in the middle of them, and any method other than brute force for those kinds of things aren't really documented

mudlord · Post by **mudlord** » Mon May 19, 2008 3:32 am

Nach: Sounds reasonable. I've finished up with my university assessment work, which leaves exam time, so I might have some free time to look into something as well. Though, knowing how you know crypto more than I, I'd love to see the...goods...nonetheless.

byuu · Post by **byuu** » Mon May 19, 2008 4:04 am

Why are you trying to protect a GPL'ed binary, anyway? Your source will always be available. And even for a newbie, compiling from source can't possibly be that hard. I'm sure if they all worked together on it for a week, they'd manage.

mudlord · Post by **mudlord** » Mon May 19, 2008 4:18 am

Why are you trying to protect a GPL'ed binary, anyway? Your source will always be available. And even for a newbie, compiling from source can't possibly be that hard. I'm sure if they all worked together on it for a week, they'd manage.

They are persistently reshacking the executable and claiming it as thier own work.

As of this stage, they hardly bothered to use the source. And I don't have much confidence (read: none) in them at all.

neo_bahamut1985 · Post by **neo_bahamut1985** » Mon May 19, 2008 5:21 am

I saw on various forums on why you it's necessary to encrypt the source. So, I take back my comment on it not being necessary...might be a good idea after all. We don't want some idiot claiming to be an "emulator author" making "improvements" on an already awesome emulator.

byuu · Post by **byuu** » Mon May 19, 2008 5:40 am

Well, I guess if you're worried about it, that's fine. But I believe a properly working binary encryption would just force them to build their own binaries from source. I know, you can say they aren't capable all day, but anyone can learn that. Anyone. You're at a severe disadvantage by using the GPL if you don't want people modifying your work.

Sorry that you have to put up with this, by the way. It's really sad that this kind of stuff still goes on. On the bright side, from what I've seen with other binary credit hacks back in the old days, they're unlikely to fool even a single person with this stuff. Probably best to just ignore them.

mudlord · Post by **mudlord** » Mon May 19, 2008 5:53 am

Well, I guess if you're worried about it, that's fine. But I believe a properly working binary encryption would just force them to build their own binaries from source.

I see your point.

You're at a severe disadvantage by using the GPL if you don't want people modifying your work.

I know, but that's the problem with this project. We are bound to the GPL, no matter what. There's little I can do about that.

Sorry that you have to put up with this, by the way. It's really sad that this kind of stuff still goes on. On the bright side, from what I've seen with other binary credit hacks back in the old days, they're unlikely to fool even a single person with this stuff.

Very true, I seen lamers on various forums making fake emulators, and all I honestly can do is laugh at them. But then, its not funny when they attack something you are personally involved with. To me, I find it extremely unmotivating, but I will continue with this.

franpa · Post by **franpa** » Mon May 19, 2008 7:03 am

neo_bahamut1985 wrote:I saw on various forums on why you it's necessary to encrypt the source. So, I take back my comment on it not being necessary...might be a good idea after all. We don't want some idiot claiming to be an "emulator author" making "improvements" on an already awesome emulator.

they are not talking about encrypting the source code.