Got one more prediction of what would happen if nobody bought video games anymore... there would bu much less computer hardware improvements, if any.

Ever notice how almost every profesionally developed, graphically intensive computer game is sponsored by a computer hardware producer, such as Intel or nVidia? Let's assume, for a moment, that these sponsors are giving money to game developers with a string attached: the game must require high-end hardware. If this were so, than people who buy the game must also upgrade their hardware every once in a while to keep up. This would give more money to the computer hardware corporations, which would sponsor additional games that require better hardware that they just happen to be selling. Therefore, with no games being sold, there would be no reason to upgrade. No reason to upgrade means that there would be no income for new hardware to be produced, since it would not be sold, anyways.

Granted, I havn't proved anything, but it's just a thought.

Not sure if we pay something on top of VAT, like we do for fuel and alcohol.

Anyhow, digital media in the UK = expensive.

The only real thing I've personally pirated was getting a second CD Key for CnC3, but there was a good reason for that. You have to have 2 copies to plan even LAN, so my bro and I said screw that and just got a 2nd key so we could play LAN. Really annoying that LAN games even forced a 2nd game copy. Stupid EA.... that's not cool.

Other than that, I think pirating isn't much of a good idea. Only when you bought the game once and you want to just play a LAN party (or face-off in my case) should be it be morally okay.

You are completely ignoring the other uses computers have outside video gaming with that statement. Science needs more and more power, it can take a supercomputer weeks to work out a big math problem related to astronomy, biophysics or other branches of science.

With or without video games, computers and their hardware will evolve.

Good point, Bjossi; forgot that computers exist for more than gaming (-:

Maybe the GeForce line, which is designed specifically for gaming, might die out, but the Quadro line would still chug on. I can definately see the processor companies going on, but I still think that processor development would at least slow down a bit, assuming that my big conspiracy theory is correct.

Commercial video cards would languish though.

That will happen in the end. Video cards are just dedicated processors, after all. The CPU will eventually be able to do all the work on it's own. Or perhaps we will see a special gamer card, that has multi-purpose processing cores for each task at hand.

Only time will tell. Though I'm still gonna dream about it.

I've seen some articles theorizing that it would be possible for a GPU to completely replace a CPU. Wishy washy "maybe", but intersting...

Not unlikely, but it can happen the other way around too. Ever since the Core 2 Duo, processors keep getting better and better faster and faster. So the question is; which evolves faster, the GPU or the CPU?

It has been proven that dedicated cards are not very populair, except for the GPU of course. For example, the PhysX card has been a total fail. Nobody uses it really.

Maybe a CPU with dedicated parts on it would be a hit. A gamer CPU that has a core for the physics, a core for the NPC's/AI's, etc.

An AI processor was being considered some time. I guess they came to the unavoidable conclusion that it was a stupid idea.

Just like the PPU. But since nVidia bought out Aegia, they will probably implement the PPU into their future video cards. That will be the closest we have ever gotten to a gamer card.

Answer: the average individual's desire for full compensation for the inconveniences that come with life... oh, right, computers... I would assume GPU. After all, GPUs are already good at using multiple threads for compensating for low clock frequencies. it would be easier for a GPU to throw on a good 3.0GHz processor than for a CPU to add the GPU elements, right?

Sorry to bump, but I thought this was interesting.

http://www.safenet-inc.com/products/sen ... e_keys.asp

An installation disk could come packaged with a plug-in device that is required for the use of the software. Found something similar in a computer running some sort of mad scientist contraption. Supposedly the ultimate solution against software piracy.

Oh,yay...

I just know I'm going to lose that like I do the remote.

I can also imagine some poor sob having to plug that into the back of his computer,not likely with all the USBs on PCs these days,but non-the-less possible.

Yeah, I can definitely see problems with that.

I could imagine a new system that everybody could adopt, where each game comes with a cap that contains a hardware key. Each cap could be plugged into a USB device that would be a couble tubes that hold the caps and have some wiring to allow for USB communication between the caps and the PC. However, that would increase the price of software and also make it unavailable to download through legal channels, such as Steam.

Whoever said that is a moron. The core files can still easily be disassembled and the device check removed by people who know what they are doing. The only difference here is that a device check is made rather than a CD check.

I think you're missing the point. The registration key is not software based, but hardware based. If you can manufacture an integrated circuit that is basically a finite state machine with its own data enryption and registration key, then that could be a possibility. The way such a system could work is that the program on the computer and the hardware registration key both transmit the encoded registration key along with some modifiers and require a 2-way confirmation to make the program work. I'm just making random guesses, but apperantly, some programmers trust licesnses worth tens of thousands of dollars. I'll get you a link to the site enxt time I'm at work so you can tell the developers that they are morons.

Edit: Oh, I just noticed i did post the link a while back. http://www.safenet-inc.com/products/sen ... e_keys.asp

How does that make hacking impossible? The files can still be compromised and stripped of all anti-piracy measures.

Look at Bioshock. When you run the game you get a window that asks for a registration key to "activate" the game. All you have to do is to grab a no CD patch and you will bypass that window altogether and therefore have infinite activations, as well as no copy protection to make a CD check every few seconds.

Thinking that this fancy version of a CD check can magically make reverse engineering impossible in the literal sense is just silly. As it always has been; these anti-piracy measures hurt the customers far more than the pirates. I don't know where these criminals will draw the line, but I hope it will happen before I have to install rootkits and whatnot in order to get legally bought software running.

You missed the point. 2-way confirmation, not 1-way. Consider the common data encryption method. For example, you send your credit card number to Amazon. Your computer receives a large (100+ digits) prime number, does some math with that number and the ASCII binary equivalent of your credit card number, then sends that data back to Amazon. However, that messaage cannot be cracked unless you have two other operands that Amazon generated and nobody else knows. Then, Amazon would use those secret operands to decipher the data. Even though hackers could easily get the data you transmit and the random prime number Amazon generated, hackers could not steal your credit card number becasue they do not have the random large prime numbers that Amazon generated and keeps secret. A math professor was telling me about this and said that the idea of cracking the code basically boils down to this: "If you can find a way to compute the modulus of the power of 100-digit prime numbers and do that 10^100 times within a year, either get a job with the IRS and you're set for life or hide for the rest of your life for fear of being murdered by the entire world." Now, my guess as to how this hardware key would work is that it would follow that idea, where all the math and generation of operands is done internally in an IC, which you can't exacly probe with a standard oscilliscope. I don't know the nitty gritty details, I'm just guessing how the system could work in the big picture. I doubt you will find much information about how the devices work on the supplier's web site, but it is fun to try to guess, even though some people hardly read the first sentence before formulating a retort.

I still don't see you proving me wrong. As long as a program has an executable and dlls, a hacker could disassemble them and simply remove the code that has anything to do with this confirmation stuff. After that is done anyone can download that "contribution" by the hacker and use the program freely.

Of course this is assuming that at least one person who knows hacking has legally bought the program and received the files, and of course that the program doesn't frequently access non-local data*.

*if there is needed data not installed on the computer, it would be anything but easy to crack.

Oh, I see. I had always thought that hacks (like no disk hacks) produced a running environment for the pirated software that made the software "think" it was runnin properly on the original computer by feeding it the right registration info and such. I must have read too fast over the bit about hacks removing the parts of code that even bother to check for registration information and then recompile the code. Well, then, I guess these sentinal guys must have something special going on.

Faking the effect of registration is one method, commonly used when programs don't have an advanced system for anti-piracy. Just removing the check itself is preferable when programs are using nasty amounts of measures to corner pirates though.

Not much can be done to prevent the latter as far as I know. There would need to be innovations in the way data is distributed to the PC, such as storing a part of the program's core on a heavily encrypted website, but that creates a problem for those who don't have access to the internet.

This is an interesting subject to think about; is there a way to make hacking ridiculously difficult without giving the customers a hard time?

In addition to Bjossi's post;

Almost half of the cracked software resides in buying the original and modifying it. A bigger part exists from modified trial versions. And the rest is stolen from company networks. (that is right, hacking)