View Single Post
  #27  
Old 31-10-2009, 11:29
DABhand DABhand is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Near my PC
Posts: 5,406
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
DABhand is on a distinguished road
You already did that yourself.

1. If the wrapper is changing per .dll file, then the unprotected executable has to have different opcodes to access imports from the dll. Im assuming since I dont have the game that the dll is changed per patch, so the offsets for the imports must be changing. So what does the byte patching actually change per se?

I seen in another post, someone did for 2.601 but yet still requires an image or media in the drive, so what was patched? The game's server calling?

2. You have dug yourself into a hole, you basically declared you dont have an original game. How? Re-read what you said. Its simple as said before, if you dont want to use the media in the drive then you authenticate online. A couple of seconds worth of time to do that.

The only reason you want to circumvent that, and you said that yourself in an earlier post, is because you dont have an original version of the game.

proof -

Quote:
Originally Posted by chron
You dont need to reverse. You search the byte pattern patched in the previous patch. Then you search it in the new exe and replace it with the same bytes. This works since version 2.400. This is lame but it works.

Then you replace the string reliclive.quazal.net by 127.0.0.1 to disable the connection to the relic servers.

Crack done.
3. I was commenting on the fact a .nfo said he used a hex editor to which I said he was probably talking bollocks and used a previous crack, especially from the poor language used in the .nfo too is another reason why I think the guy was talking bollocks.

Again a crack isnt really needed for this game. So this thread should be closed.

Last edited by DABhand; 31-10-2009 at 11:32.
Reply With Quote