Take-Two Interactive hit the DMCA nuke on GTA III and Vice City reverse engineered effort

You should be able to find a mirror of the repo by searching a bit. I already had it pulled from github before the takedown. Checkout the correct branch if you want to build for Vice City or 3.

This is on Manjaro KDE with Wayland.

At the root level I had to apply:

 diff --git a/premake5.lua b/premake5.lua
index 531f92ea..987e72b3 100644
--- a/premake5.lua
+++ b/premake5.lua
@@ -354,7 +354,7 @@ project "reVC"
 
  if _OPTIONS["with-opus"] then
  filter {}
- links { "libogg" }
+ links { "ogg" }
  links { "opus" }
  links { "opusfile" }
  end

libogg is wrong.

In vendor/librw apply:

diff --git a/src/gl/gl3device.cpp b/src/gl/gl3device.cpp
index b1036c0..5184e17 100644
--- a/src/gl/gl3device.cpp
+++ b/src/gl/gl3device.cpp
@@ -1689,8 +1689,8 @@ static struct {
  int gl;
  int major, minor;
 } profiles[] = {
- { GLFW_OPENGL_API, 3, 3 },
- { GLFW_OPENGL_API, 2, 1 },
+ //{ GLFW_OPENGL_API, 3, 3 },
+ //{ GLFW_OPENGL_API, 2, 1 },
  { GLFW_OPENGL_ES_API, 3, 1 },
  { GLFW_OPENGL_ES_API, 2, 0 },
  { 0, 0, 0 },

To force GLES selection.

I compile it like this:
premake5 --with-librw --with-opus --lto gmake2
cd build
// export your compiler flags like MAKEFLAGS=-j5
make verbose=1 O=. config=release_linux-arm64-librw_gl3_glfw-oal

The binary will be at the root level in bin/ and copy the content of gamefiles/ over your game directory.

I have an overclock for the pi 400:
arm_freq=2100
gpu_freq=750
v3d_freq=750
over_voltage=6
Also using the pure kms driver:
dtoverlay=vc4-kms-v3d-pi4

Awesome, thank you!

Corporations being evil thunder**** non-shocker.

I'd promise to not buy any more of their games but with the DRM they load them with these days I had already done that years ago.

After some review, they can't put it back on?

Corporations being evil thunder**** non-shocker.

Ha, one of the reasons I enjoy this page a bit more than others is that there isn't a language filter. Sure, there are some people who overly use such colorful words, but occasionally it just needs to be said unfiltered, and I believe this is one of those times.

Ah I hate that kind of moment, but I love it too when I see the community cloning everything everywhere.
Fuckers.

I saw these "I saw this coming a mile away" comments coming a mile away, and I don't even use imperial units.

I've found a mirror of the re3 git, but I'm unable to clone it.
git clone link.to.the.git.repo --branch master --single-branch
Cloning into 're3'...
fatal: early EOF
error: Unable to find 7185ba37b55bb8d199fb22043b0b83c2c153c1bd under link.to.the.git.repo
Cannot obtain needed blob 7185ba37b55bb8d199fb22043b0b83c2c153c1bd
while processing commit bf7280b55bffd568b00d5145f5799c7f73114ffc.
error: fetch failed.

Could anyone help?

Y'all think one of most fierce defender of loot box publishers will allowed their still valuable cash-cow franchise milked without getting their cuts?

These one of reasons why EA is no longer most hated game-related companies.

Saw this one coming. I hope Github doesn't get hate for this like they did with Youtube-dl. Github are not to blame for this, they have no choice but to comply with the awful DMCA

So, that's no actually true. I'll have to dig up the appropriate video, but a particular Business Lawyer clarified the DMCA provisions relating to takedowns. There is no requirement to takedown content from a DMCA request. All that provision does is protect the platform owner from liability on both sides. Basically, it protects hosts from being "caught in the middle" of a copyright dispute and facing a lawsuit from the organization requesting the takedown and from the users affected by the takedown.

But, as can be seen with a recent copyright case between Cox Communications and Sony Music, if a company doesn't actually comply with the DMCA takedown, they lose the immunity to lawsuits.... making them liable for an infringement by their users.

Yes if Github does not comply with every single DMCA takedown they will loose their safe harbour status and will instead be liable for every single thing that their end users upload to Github. So in practice Github have no choice but to comply.

Y'all think one of most fierce defender of loot box publishers will allowed their still valuable cash-cow franchise milked without getting their cuts?

These one of reasons why EA is no longer most hated game-related companies.

Isn't Capcom worse (Street Fighter V)?

Source is available here :

https://paste.yunohost.org/iyusuloguk.scala


Last edited by liberodark on 23 Feb 2021 at 1:33 pm UTC

Source is available here :

redacted
redacted

Thanks, cloning works correctly with the mirrors you posted (seems like there was something broken about the one I had found before).


[Btw, if anyone needs the build instructions for Linux, they're available on the web archive.](https://web.archive.org/web/20210217192751/https://github.com/GTAmodding/re3/wiki/Building-on-Linux)


Last edited by DoctorJunglist on 23 Feb 2021 at 1:20 pm UTC

So.....please don't post that stuff in the open, at least have the courtesy to keep it between yourselves. I like the site, and really don't want it involved in having to moderate more because some lawyer thinks it's a good idea to hit up the place (which is permissible under the laws of where GOL is located).

Really, please, don't ruin things for the rest of us.

I redacted my post.

I kept the archive.org link, because afaik this site operates in a legal manner.


Last edited by DoctorJunglist on 23 Feb 2021 at 1:27 pm UTC

And of course the great irony being that the project will be likely far more widely distributed now that it's made headlines and everyone will be looking for it.

Streisand effect ftw :D

Cheers - to be absolutely clear I have no moral objections and really dislike the dmca slapdown to begin with, it's just a risk thing that I've seen go sour before.

While I don't think that they can do much harm with their DMCA in the UK, I'd also be ... cautious.

There are sort of equivalent laws in the UK, although what they'll look like 6 months from now who knows!

Good to know, thanks!

Not a legal expert but whether it's a clean room reverse engineer or not, the point remains that these people brought the game to native platforms, at the expense of their own time and 0 costs. They kept it open source and clearly stated you need to own the game to play, it's not like they were including the assets too. If I was Rockstar/Take Two, I'd give these people my blessing and let them do their thing as long as it's not harming anyone.

I considered buying these games solely thanks to this project, looks like I'll save my money from the greedy bullies.


Last edited by Avehicle7887 on 23 Feb 2021 at 7:19 pm UTC

Really sad to see...
Out of curiosity, if now someone would write specifications based on that code, and another one would write another engine reimplementation based on that specifications, would be it legal ?

Really sad to see...
Out of curiosity, if now someone would write specifications based on that code, and another one would write another engine reimplementation based on that specifications, would be it legal ?

Depends on how many lawyers get involved. The thing is, clean lab reverse engineering is perfectly legal. From my understanding of it, if it wasn't the PC as it is today would not exist, as IBM's architecture was open, but their BIOS was not, and it was reverse engineered.
In this day and age though, all that needs to be done is for a company to cry foul (claim DMCA) and the project goes away.
The process that is illegal is if they had someone from tge original project working with them, then it would not be considered 'clean'.
(Not a lawyer, juat remembered it from reading things years ago when people were doing similar things with other games.)

Really sad to see...
Out of curiosity, if now someone would write specifications based on that code, and another one would write another engine reimplementation based on that specifications, would be it legal ?

Depends on how many lawyers get involved. The thing is, clean lab reverse engineering is perfectly legal. From my understanding of it, if it wasn't the PC as it is today would not exist, as IBM's architecture was open, but their BIOS was not, and it was reverse engineered.
In this day and age though, all that needs to be done is for a company to cry foul (claim DMCA) and the project goes away.
The process that is illegal is if they had someone from tge original project working with them, then it would not be considered 'clean'.
(Not a lawyer, juat remembered it from reading things years ago when people were doing similar things with other games.)

Well it depends, AFAIK the concept of clean room reverse-engineering does not exist in the legal system. Phoenix did it the way they did when they created their version of IBM:s BIOS not to avoid the copyright of the BIOS but that of the IBM Technical Reference Manuals which is what IBM had put a license on.