Data encryption question (technical and ethical)

[Crimson Wizard]

Since the AGS source code is open, there's no problem in writing a data decompiler. Probably it is possible to restore the project to the point where you can extract all the in-game resources (except original filenames of the imported material).

In this situation is there any sense in data encryption?
Does everyone realize that every game made before source is opened may be now decompiled?
May that prevent some people from using AGS in the future?
( Am I doing a wrong thing telling this to everyone?  )

Thinking further on encryption, I see only one way to make it more useful - is to change the encryption key in the data compiler/engine for each specific game. IDK how difficult that would be for experienced hackers to find an address of the key in default engine executable and then deduce its address and value in game's one. Maybe not so, unless the code has more changes, or compiled with different settings etc.
Any thoughts on this?

[JJS]

Meh, I would leave the encryption as it is. There is no point in making it "stronger" because the engine is still open source and the key has to be stored somewhere.

I would say that the kind of person who rips off your art assets will more likely screenshot them instead of writing a decompiler no matter how easy or hard it is to do so.

But I never made a game, so I am no expert on this.

[Alan v.Drake]

Meh, I would leave the encryption as it is. There is no point in making it "stronger" because the engine is still open source and the key has to be stored somewhere.

I would say that the kind of person who rips off your art assets will more likely screenshot them instead of writing a decompiler no matter how easy or hard it is to do so.

Ditto.
It's like those hilarious sites with javascript code that deny right-clicks even when one can just print screen and get the damn picture. Adding additional layers of security won't make it better, it will just make it messier.

- Alan

[Crimson Wizard]

Well, that was my point too, that it will be practically impossible to keep the data from being ripped anyway.
But here goes the second question: won't that scare off commercial game developers?

One thing is making a screenshot with characters/guis/cursor over background, another thing is extracting resources in their original state.

[Calin Leafshade]

This point has come up before.

Everyone agreed that it kinda doesnt matter. You can rip resources from most AAA games or indeed basically *any* game if you are determined enough and it doesnt really hurt them in any tangible way so I wouldnt worry about it.

[Crimson Wizard]

I was thinking that it is possible to make a stand-alone browser utility to see what's inside the game.
I mean, it should be legal, but how... umm... ethical.

[Snarky]

As long as the AGS devs refrain from implementing an app like that, I don't see the problem.

[Crimson Wizard]

I must restrain... err, refrain then.

[JJS]

One nice benefit of removing the encryption might be that games compress better. That being said, I don't know how good the encryption is at making everything look like noise.

[SSH]

How hard would it be to make an AGS compiler/utility that could be triggered by a PHP script or somesuch on a web server to make a unique version of the game encrypted with a unique key, which needed to be set up at install time. It wouldn't stop people from copying, but at least you'd know whose copy the copying came from.

This might be especially useful for betas, as I know that Dave G's had beta versions leaked on occasion and one would probably want to ban the culprit from beta testing again...

[Sslaxx]

Beta leaking is an entirely different question from decompiling game assets or code.

[Eric]

In fact, if you look at the site's not-yet-updated FAQ, this is given as one of the two reasons that the source code won't be released.

My question is, and it's not rhetorical, what would be the real danger in having these games be decompilable? Is there really a genuine widespread fear of others stealing art assets?

[Crimson Wizard]

My question is, and it's not rhetorical, what would be the real danger in having these games be decompilable? Is there really a genuine widespread fear of others stealing art assets?

Perhaps real game devs should answer this; I myself don't have such fear, but I just have certain care about game devs who may have their own opinion on this .

How hard would it be to make an AGS compiler/utility that could be triggered by a PHP script or somesuch on a web server to make a unique version of the game encrypted with a unique key, which needed to be set up at install time. It wouldn't stop people from copying, but at least you'd know whose copy the copying came from.

Earlier I stated that: it is enterely possible to take engine source and change it so that it will produce totally unique encryption/decryption for this certain game you are making (or number of games you are making).
Now when I read the Artistic License more closely I am not really sure that you may disclose the source from the end-users.
It sais that:

You may Distribute a Modified Version in Compiled form without the Source, provided that you comply with Section 4 with respect to the Source of the Modified Version.

Section 4 states that:

You may Distribute your Modified Version as Source provided that you clearly document how it differs from the Standard Version, including, but not limited to, documenting any non-standard features, executables, or modules, and provided that you do at least ONE of the following:

And one of "the following" is:

make the Modified Version available to the Copyright Holder of the Standard Version, under the Original License, so that the Copyright Holder may include your modifications in the Standard Version.

or

ensure that installation of your Modified Version does not prevent the user installing or running the Standard Version. In addition, the Modified Version must bear a name that is different from the name of the Standard Version.

So, basically, does that mean that the person can keep his source closed from anyone except original author, or closed from everyone if it does not counterfere with "standard" installation?

If yes, then that method may have certain sense, but it will have certain drawbacks:
1. A game dev should care about hacking the compiler and engine, as well as updating it with latest official changes on his own.
2. The AGS team (ones that work on developing the engine) will not longer be able to effectively support the engine that runs this game, since the code is different and there's no guarantee the author of the changes did not break anything himself.

[BigMc]

Really? The reason why you can work on AGS is because it's open source. And you think about how to make it closed again because of this? Also, what do you want to achieve? Your plans went from improving encryption to writing a decompiler and back in this thread, so why care at all?

[Crimson Wizard]

Really? The reason why you can work on AGS is because it's open source. And you think about how to make it closed again because of this? Also, what do you want to achieve? Your plans went from improving encryption to writing a decompiler and back in this thread, so why care at all?

I never planned on improving encryption. In fact, one of my first questions was "In this situation is there any sense in data encryption?". I was thinking about completely removing it for future versions, exactly because there's no sense in this now.
My plans never went back and forth, I had no certain plans in regard to encryption yet. In this thread I was trying to know other ppl opinion on this.
And I don't know how you came to a thought I want to close AGS's source. I stated that game devs could make their own copy and make it closed. Probably.