CPU: AMD or Intel 1.2 GHz, 2 GHz or faster recommended
Memory: 256 MB or higher, 512 MB recommended
Hard Drive: 4 GB free disk space
Sound Card: DirectX 9.0c compliant, Sound Blaster® X-Fi series card recommended
Video Card: 64 MB DirectX 9.0c video card (see supported list)
Disc Drive: 4X CD-ROM drive required to install and play
Supported Video cards*: NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200, 5300, 5500, 5600, 5700, 5800, 5900, 5950, 6200, 6500, 6600, 6800, 7800
ATI Radeon 9500, 9600, 9700, 9800, X300, X600, X700, X800, X850
*Intel Extreme Graphics and SiS chipsets not supported
1.) Unrar, Burn CD1 Using BlindWrite 4.5.7 (disable Autoplay in
Options), burn in DAO PW at 4x, click "YES" when asked if you
want to physically include BWA information. If mounting in
DT4, remove or hide all IDE drives.
2.) Be sure to install with CD2 and CD3 from either BC or NOGRP
images and have fun
《Stubbs The Zombie: Rebel Without a Pulse》采用了Bungie的第一人称射击游戏《光晕》中同样的引擎技术。在《Stubbs The Zombie》中玩家将扮演僵尸Stubbs，他拥有一座极端先进的未来城市，而他自己是反叛者，他疯狂的敌人们都拥有武器。游戏情节异想天开，充斥着一种冷幽默，但游戏中的格斗技巧却是创新的。
“Wideload公司解放了一种前所未有的体验。有任何其他人能在游戏中创造这么一位不死的英雄吗？他吃大脑，象投掷樱桃炸弹一样扔他自己的内脏，同时还能抽空与女人调情。那些家伙们如此的无聊，我们对此无话可说。”Aspyr的总裁Michael Rogers说，“Stubbs The Zombie将使玩家对死亡有一个新的认知。”
[codebox]How it all began...
In 1933, Edward "Stubbs" Stubblefield was just another traveling salesman
trying to get by during the Great Depression. His lifelong losing streak
reached its logical conclusion when he was brutally murdered and
ignominiously buried in a remote Pennsylvania field
It's a sad day today. Securom has introduced Starforce-like technology
and new blacklstings against DTool4, Alcohol, Starforce Nightmare, SRStop,
Anti-Blaxx, and so on.
To get this release to work, you will need to do the following:
0) Install the game.
1) Mount image in DTool4.
2) Make sure you only have 1 Virtual CD device. If you have an Alcohol virtual
device, e.g., disable it. If you have 2 Daemon Tool drives. Set it only to 1.
3) Use Star[内容被过滤，请注意论坛文明]er (included) and click on either primary or
secondary all_cd_agressive.' A message will pop up
"nur dann ok anclicken, wenn zu ende gespielt!" That translates to,
click 'ok' when u have finished playing. So, Don't click OK if you want to play.
3.5) Some of you will need to unplug your IDE drives.
4) Click on desktop icon and play.
btw, if u get the msg "required security module can not be activated"
you might need to reboot.
You can also convert the .mds file to a .bwa file, create a Blindwrite
image, and burn it. You will need to unplug your IDE drives and use an
USB drive. We've tested this and it works.
Some groups, (recently formed, one might add ), have been trying to claim
that Blindwrite is better than Alcohol, and have been producing propers
on this basis. It is worth mentioning that this debate started and was
settled long ago, long before the group in question was formed, back when
Securom 4.8 was introduced. So, Alcohol or Blindwrite? The million dollar
question. The Answer: We prefer Alcohol, but it doesn't matter. Both have
advantages and disadvantages. Here is why.
Quote from a discussion long ago:
"Blindwrite's Twinpeaks feature uses the information stored in the .bwa-files
(which, as we remember, tells how long it takes to read a sector on the
disc). Now it uses a trick to "fake" this reading delay - the same sector
is burned twice onto the disc, with exactly the same information including
the sector number. This is a violation of the CDR-standard (the so-called
orange-book), but as most CD-drives read both sectors but only deliver one,
the delay of reading the second sector suffices to trick SecuROM
into recognizing the disc as valid. However some drives, e.g. some Plextors,
report errors if the same sector is stored twice on the disc. As this is a
violation of the standards, this is nothing negative, in fact this only
happens with drives who strictly obey the standards.
The drawback of this method is that today's copyprotections (i.e. SecuROM)
can easily be altered to check for these manipulations, too. So this ability
to copy SecuROM will most certainly not last very long, and if you're unlucky,
your copy will become invalid with the next patch for the game because the
patch will also update the copy protection (like No One Lives Forever 2 v1.2,
Anno 1503 v1.02, Neverwinter Nights 1.21...)"
So what does this mean? It means that
1) Blindwrite clones might not work if companies patch it in the future,
whereas Alcohol would continue to work.
2) As Blindwrite is not a true clone, it may not work on some drives.
3) Blindwrite mounted has the same disadvantages as Alcohol, namely that it
is subject to blacklisting.
Here are some further reasons in favour of Alcohol. If you are really keen
on having a Blindwrite image, you can EASILY use an .mds to .bwa converter
(e.g. dpmv.exe) and create a .bwa file to burn as Blindwrite. This means that
an Alcohol clone has everything you need to get a Blindwrite image if you choose to.
If you only had a Blindwrite image, then you couldn't convert back if 1) or 2)
obtained. In those cases, if you have Blindwrite, you are out of luck! Moreover,
an .mds made by Alcohol using high precision dpm is in fact better than the .bwa
created by Blindwrite. So even if you like Blindwrite, you should use Alcohol to create
the .bwa file.
So why not just Alcohol?
Well, Alcohol requires mounting which can be blacklisted. In those cases,
it might be better to convert the .mds to .bwa so that the end user doesn't have
to do it. But to make sure that you will be future-compatible, one should always
include the .mds in case you want to mount it in the future after a patch has been
Upshot: Alcohol or Blindwrite? We prefer Alcohol, but we think it doesn't matter.
Both have advantages and disadvantages. But from now on, unless there are serious
changes to existing technologies, PROPER of formats will be seriously nuked.
Other lame things not to do or put in the nfo:
1. With the advent of DTool4, one can easily make mini-images of DVDs. Therefore,
clonecds are not superior to clonedvds. Please, newbie group, do your homework before
making unsubstantiated claims.
2. We don't think m0 compression should be propered unless you are racing, as that is just
3. 'Use serials from other source' is seriously lame. Make your own serials or don't
4. SFclones are not 'true 1:1 copies.' Otherwise, they would work on burners as well
as regular non-burner cdroms just like the original would.
|.:.MisterX & MisterY.:.:.. \/ // | ||/| ||::.::.:::.Site Scripts V2.0:|
? 捋草 苒? 苘圻?
苘? 苘苒圹? 咣曹 薏? 捋草
圹圹圮 咣圹槽 懿曹 捋圹咣圮? 苘圹? 咣圮
圹圹圹? 捋圹坜圹膊?圹草 哌鄄? ? 圹圻圹苘 捋圹圮?
捋鄄葸圹?懿圹鄄葸圹? 圹草 捋草卟?圹??咣曹 鞍 苘苘 捋圻咣圹曹
苓圹鄄 咣鄄咣圹草 苘曹 捋鄄? 苒圻 苘苻鄄? 捋草 苒圻哌咣圹草 咣膊
捋鄄? ?苒圹鄄 捋鄄蒉圹曹圹圹苒圹圹蒉圹? 苒圻苘圹蒉膊 圹草 鞍 捋草 ?
捋圹曹 哌圯圹圹?圹圹圹哌 捋鄄 圹圮圹圹哌圹舶膊? 捋鄄 ?苒圹苒鄄
圹? 苘膊哌哕 咣圹圹圹圹策 圹草 圹鄄策 捋草 捋曹 苒圹?苒圹哌圹草
? 苒策 ? ? 捋哌 卟? 圹草 捋膊? 圹草 咣鄄圹圻苒圹圹哕苓 圹草
?捋草 卟? 苓 ? 掭 捋圹? 捋槽 捋圹圮苘苒圮苒圹咣鄄蒉圯 捋鄄
鄄曹 ? ? 鞍鞍鞍 ? 捋圹哌哌 捋圹圻咣圹哌? 捋槽 咣苻鄄圮
苓 咣圹圮苘? 鞍 iks!ttn ? 鞍 ?苘咣鄄圹鄄卑 圹哌? 捋葸
圯 苒哌 哌曹 苘苒哌咣苘? 鞍 ?鞍鞍 苒哕鄄策 ?鞍 ??? 苒?苘
薏苒?苘圻咣苘? 咣苒? ? ? 哌曹 ? 薏蒉鄄草 鞍鞍鞍 懿? 懿?懿?佰
捋草苒?苒? 哕 捋? 卟? 懿? 薏葸咣哌圹苘?咣苒鄄曹 鞍稗草 薏?薏?鄄圹
圹圹草 捋? 苓 哕 ? ?苘策 卟? 哌哌圹苒哌圹苘 ?卟? 卟?卟?佰
鄄蒇? 咣懿?? 苘苘苘膊哌哌 苘苘苘懿策哌哌哌哌哌圹鄄苘 哌圮苒圹苒圹苘
鄄蒉草 ? 苘策哌?苘苘苘懿哌哌哌哌 哌圮 苒圻?
鄄?咣? 苒?苘圹圻哌 捋圹哕苘 ?
圹咣? 哌 圹?圹圻 苘? 苘? 苘? 圹鄄? ?
捋? 哌 ?捋?捋圯? 捋? 薏? 安? 圹圯 卟??
咣? 圻?捋圯捋? 懿?苘卟?苘苓圮 苘? 苘边圮 圹圹? 卟?
? 哌圮苘苘 ?膊? 圹圮 苒郯 ? 圹稗草 鄄 捋蒈圻斑膊?膊 捋?圹?哌圮? 懿?
圹苘 哌哌 北?捋?咣苒咣郾佰鄄哕圮策 圹苒咿圯 稗膊莶圮圻 圹? 咣??
鄄哌圹苘?鞍?鞍败咣? ?安鄄 圹?圹 咣?鄄 咣苓圮苘膊?圹 咣?圹? 捋?
鄄 哌?北? 捋 ? ? ? 哌? 膊圹? ? 哌
鄄 哕膊? ? PROUDLY PRESENTS 膊圹? ?
圹 捋膊 Stubbs the Zombie in Rebel without a Pulse 薏圯 掭
圹 圹?苘 © 咣圹 苒
圹苓 捋圻 Aspyr Media ? 圹槽苘圻甙
圹蒈苒哌 捋? 苘策甙卟苒圹?苘苒佰脖?
圹圻 ?RELEASE DATE :: 11.27.2005 薏策苒脖曹咣圮鄄哌 馨
圹? ?PROTECTION :: Securom 7.00.0002 膊蒉鄄北膊蒉鄄?懿鄄辈?
苒圹? SIZE :: 56x15mb 捋?咣脖策苒草鞍槽脖北草
苘 哌圮 MEDIATYPE :: CD 哌圮苘? 槽? 咣鄄膊?
鄄草 捋槽圻 FORMAT :: BWI/BWS/BWT/BWA 哌圹馨哌圮 哌?
膊?苒圹圹 捋? 哌 ?
? 圻 ?咣苒? 安? 苘脖?
?掭 曹圹草 鄄 苒哌 ?
? ?圹圹圮 哕鄄苓 苒? 败曹
?? 圹圹咣圹? ? 捋圯 捋? ??
? 圹鄄 捋圻 苓哕 ? 苓哕 苓哕 苓?苓?? 圮 ?苓?圮 苓?圹 圹 鼙曹
哌哕圹圹苒??圻?佰 鞍圻?佰哌?哌郯圻 鞍鞍郯哕郯郯郯郯鞍圻鞍掭?圹 氨北臂莅
氨曹?咣?咣? 哌 哌 哌 ?哌 哌 ? ? ? ? 哌 ? 膊 弑策
哌圮 ? 鄄 ? 苘懿槽圹咣圮? 鼙曹 哕 咣?懿?卟?卟? 北 哕
咣? 鄄? 鄄 卟?氨槽圹策哌苘策哌掭鞍薇北草?掭稗草 ?馨薏莅薏莅鞍 掭
薏莅 捋膊 ? 策 懿? 哕 弑策 苘?懿哕曹 懿?懿? 懿
败策懿??哕圮 鞍 鞍鞍掭鞍稗圯 鞍北膊圹圹懿懿策 薏? 哕 哌 苘懿哌
薏? ? 圮?? 哕 咣? 安圯 懿苓曹 卟? ? 哌咣策?
卟? 膊? 哌 ?咣?? ?哌苘? ? ? 卟苘
斑圮 辈? ? 哌圮卟? 哌哌? 咣圯
鼙?圹舶辈 哌哕苘苘 捋?
哌哕鄄哕圹 Stubbs, a zombie who'll tug at your heartstrings and tickle 圹
苘圻? 圹?your funnybone even as he's tearing the living guts right out of 圹
圹?your body. This former traveling salesman trades in his 圹
圹?briefcase for your braincase as the leading man in Wideload's 圹
圹?first game, Stubbs the Zombie in "Rebel Without a Pulse". 圹
圹? In this game, players take on the role of the rebel himself 圹
圹?Stubbs, a wisecracking Zombie who takes on an ultra-modern city 圹
圹?of the future using nothing but his own carcass and the weapons 圹
圹?of his possessed enemies. The game's tongue-in-cheek humor, 圹
圹?innovative combat and strong storyline keep Stubbs the Zombie's 圹
圹?gameplay as bizarre and unpredictable as its namesake. 圹
圹? On his quest, Stubbs lurches his way through numerous large 圹
圹?and visually captivating indoor/outdoor environments in and 圹
圹?around the gleaming city of Punchbowl, PA, a city built during 圹
圹?the Eisenhower administration to show off the ultra-futuristic 圹
圹?technology of the 21st century. Stubbs' brain-eating adventure 圹
圹?brings him through bustling shopping districts and verdant 圹
圹?farmlands to battle mad scientists, rural militiamen and the 圹
圹?world's deadliest barbershop quartet. His enemies have shotguns, 圹
圹?tanks, and all manner of futuristic weaponry. All Stubbs has is 圹
圹?his own rotting corpse, a distinct lack of pain or conscience, 圹
圹?and the ability to turn foes into zombie allies. 圹
圹? What begins as one zombie's search for revenge quickly 圹
圹?escalates into an all-out war between the living and the dead - 圹
圹?but this time it's the zombie fighting for truth, justice and 圹
圹?the redemption of true love. Yes, it's a love story too. 圹
? 苓 圹? 圹
卟咿? 圻? 苘 圹
? 苒圮圻 ? 圹
懿?捋圹圯 鼙? 圹
? 咣圻圮 ? 圹
苓鼙曹 膊? 咣苘? 圹
蒉鄄辈?北? 捋圻哌哌 ?苘 圹
圮弑策 鞍? 圹 苓 咣圹
咣圮苘 鞍 鄄 ? 圯 捋?
哌苒卟槽圮?哌圹?圮 ?圻?? 苓?? ? 圮 ?苓哕 ? 苓?策薏? 懿圹
? 哕 卟 咣?斑舶?咣斑卟佰甙 圮?舶 ?鞍??哕?郯安安甙安?斑哕卟膊苘懿策佰?
卟? 掭 掭 薏? ?? ? 哌???哌 哌 ? ? 哌 哌? ? 哌懿?哌哌败 苒?
苓 ?苒? 苘哌 苘哌苘?? 苘苘苒圹圹? 懿?卟咿槽
掭 鞍捋? 鄄 苒?懿? ?? 苘咣圻斑 膊? ? 败槽?
? 北斑圮? 薏蒉圯 薏?懿??氨槽圹鄄卑鞍? 苓 苓 鼙曹 哌膊苘懿策咣?
膊? 哌咣苒圮鄄?卟?? ? 掭 掭 鞍北槽? 哌?? 圹
圹?? 哌哌哌哌哌? 哕 哕 弑策 ? 圹
圹策 ? ? 圹
圹曹? ? 圹
圹?1.) Unrar, Burn CD1 Using BlindWrite 4.5.7 (disable Autoplay in 圹
圹? Options), burn in DAO PW at 4x, click "YES" when asked if you 圹
圹? want to physically include BWA information. If mounting in 圹
圹? DT4, remove or hide all IDE drives. 圹
圹?2.) Be sure to install with CD2 and CD3 from either BC or NOGRP 圹
圹? images and have fun 圹
圹?Proper Notes: 圹
圹?This was a most interesting release, It seems that Securom modded 圹
圹?Securom 7.00.0002 to have IDE Priority, to prevent those pesky 圹
圹?emulators and loaders from working. This really is not as dramatic圹
圹?as nogrp nfo made it out to be. All this new Securom does is it 圹
圹?scans the drives on your system to see if any IDE drives are 圹
圹?present. If there are IDE drives, Securom forces you to use those 圹
圹?drives to verify image. This does not affect people burning the 圹
圹?image as emu-burn, twinsector or plex 1:1. Thus, This new Securom 圹
圹?means that groups MUST image Securom in BLINDWRITE FORMAT for 圹
圹?proper burning, as now emulation requires machines with none or 圹
圹?hidden IDE drives. Groups really should be doing this in the 圹
圹?first place and stop being lame with alcohol 120 on Securom. 圹
圹?Its very stupid for nogrp to release an alcohol image that only 圹
圹?works mounted when all ide drives are hidden or disabled, when 圹
圹?they could have imaged the game in BWClone format so the end user 圹
圹?can choose to either burn the image, and totally bypass the IDE 圹
圹?priority, or mount it and disable their IDE drives. 圹
圹?Not only did NOGRP/BC release a Securom A120 release, they 圹
圹?released a screwed up A120 MDS. Both Their image lacks a decent 圹
圹?MDS file. The MDS file was soo messed up that bwabuilder was 圹
圹?unable to open the NOGRP MDS file, and the only reason the 圹
圹?clone ran was because DT4 had to fake the MDS since their 圹
圹?MDS never worked right. As for BC MDS, there was horrendous 圹
圹?topology recorded in their MDS file. This is usually caused when 圹
圹?the computer is being used during the MDS reading procedure. 圹
圹?More specifically, the mouse being moved around and clicked. 圹
圹?Seems making proper MDS files doesn't require a lot of random 圹
圹?button clicking . 圹
圹?Our image is in BW Format so that you are able to burn the 圹
圹?image (1:1 or not) to get around the IDE prioritizing. You also 圹
圹?will not have to worry about nonworking future patches since 圹
圹?MiRROR image is flawless and will create a most excellent burn. 圹
圹?Mounting is also possible, and verification is faster since our 圹
圹?BWA is good and the image itself is in proper format. Maybe if 圹
圹?the NOGRP peeps would stop bashing bwclones and pasting old 圹
圹?ancient MISQUOTED text, written to be MISLEADING, from the 圹
圹?cdfreaks forums, and start figuring out why MiRROR is soo 圹
圹?insistent on using bwclone instead of a120, they'll actually 圹
圹?learn something. Our Stubbs the Zombie was imaged and bwaed from 圹
圹?a retail release, and we triple tested both the retail and our 圹
圹?BWClone to find any evidence of starforce-like protections. Other 圹
圹?than IDE drive prioritizing, This game really isn't protected 圹
圹?with anything more than Securom 7.00.0002 modified to pick on 圹
圹?people who like to emulate clones. So instead of nogrp attempt to 圹
圹?learn what is different about Securom, and maybe figure out why 圹
圹?we do things different from other grps, they instead just release 圹
圹?a improper bad image and bash superior cloning methods without 圹
圹?even trying it. 圹
圹? Also, NOGRP's nfo has a lot of mistakes, and myths around it 圹
圹?that really need clearing up. The cdfreak's quote 圹
圹? - found here: http://club.cdfreaks.com/showthread.php?t=64370& - 圹
圹?was truncated halfway in nogrp nfo, namely the part that says 圹
圹?"But, of course, typically for a post on alcohol's site, they 圹
圹?neglect to mention that there has not yet been any securom 4.8x 圹
圹?game released that cannot be copied by the twinsector [Blindwrite]圹
圹?method. Needless to say the post also neglects to mention that 圹
圹?there is no reason whatsoever to suppose that Sony won't target 圹
圹?RMPS emulation so as to render that type of copy useless too in 圹
圹?the event of an update patch. Still, if you really want to make 圹
圹?copies that only work with emulation when, in most cases, it's 圹
圹?possible to make copies that don't need it, [he means 1:1 exact 圹
圹?clones that dont depend on emulation that is easily blacklisted, 圹
圹?and actually work as if it was bought from the store] well who am 圹
圹?I to argue?" Also note that the Twin sector method BWCloning has 圹
圹?been used since 11.14.02.Unreal.Tournament.2003.BWClone-FTFiSO & 圹
圹?11.29.02.No.One.Lives.Forever.2.CD1.BWClone-FTFiSO came out. it 圹
圹?hasn't been blacklisted or stopped since. BTW, note the date from 圹
圹?the cdfreaks post itself, when it was last edited says 圹
圹?20-02-2003, February 2003!!! The post doesn't even adress 1:1 圹
圹?plextor premium cloning (which is TOTALLY DIFFERENT form twin 圹
圹?sector method) because it was noted months before plextor 1:1 was 圹
圹?even added to blindwrite 4.5. 圹
圹?If you burn Bard's Tale with the twinpeaks method on a liteon 圹
圹?drive or similar, the game will still work, its been years since 圹
圹?twin sector method was conceived, and it has not been stopped 圹
圹?since. Same for the Plextor 1:1 Method, unstoppable. 圹
圹?Blindwrite IS a better format than A120, simply because A120 does 圹
圹?not burn 1:1 securom, at all. Let me explain, The Plextor method 圹
圹?uses rate variation techniques, which basically reads in the bwa, 圹
圹?and as its burning the disc, it burns some sections deeper than 圹
圹?normal, just like a retail securom disc. You can make a working 圹
圹?MDS/BWA file from a plex 1:1 burnt securom disc. You CANNOT do 圹
圹?this with anything burnt in a120, nor can you do this with twin 圹
圹?sector burn method. If you can make a working bwa from your burnt 圹
圹?copy, then, and only then, is it truly a 1:1 CLONE of the 圹
圹?original. This is why we image in blindwrite format, we make sure 圹
圹?all our images can be burnt in 1:1 format, first and foremost. 圹
圹?Let's Quote the NOGRP NFO: 圹
圹?1) Blindwrite clones might not work if companies patch it in the 圹
圹?future, whereas Alcohol would continue to work. " - WRONG, the 圹
圹?plex method and the twinpeaks method still work, even on today's 圹
圹?securom 7. 圹
圹?"2) As Blindwrite is not a true clone, it may not work on some 圹
圹?drives." - DEATHLY WRONG, bw is more a clone than a120 is. 圹
圹?BWCLONE does not totally depend on emulation tactics, and plextor 圹
圹?can burn BWClone 1:1 method. this is more clone than anything out 圹
圹?there for securom atm. BWClone also uses twinpeak method as a 圹
圹?alternative for people who do not own plextors. BWCLONE works 圹
圹?emulated using autoplay similar to RPMS, and lastly, bwclones can 圹
圹?work mounted. BTW Anything emulated is NOT a true clone, which 圹
圹?means A120 is NOT a true clone. 圹
圹?"3) Blindwrite mounted has the same disadvantages as Alcohol, 圹
圹?namely that it is subject to blacklisting." - yes, all emulation 圹
圹?can be blacklisted easily, at the same time the emulation tools 圹
圹?can be updated to counteract this, and this cat and mouse game 圹
圹?has been going on for years. 圹
圹?"Here are some further reasons in favour of Alcohol. If you are 圹
圹?really keen on having a Blindwrite image, you can EASILY use an 圹
圹?.mds to .bwa converter (e.g. dpmv.exe) and create a .bwa file to 圹
圹?burn as Blindwrite. This means that an Alcohol clone has 圹
圹?everything you need to get a Blindwrite image if you choose to. 圹
圹?If you only had a Blindwrite image, then you couldn't convert 圹
圹?back if 1) or 2) obtained. In those cases, if you have 圹
圹?Blindwrite, you are out of luck! Moreover, an .mds made by 圹
圹?Alcohol using high precision dpm is in fact better than the .bwa 圹
圹?created by Blindwrite. So even if you like Blindwrite, you 圹
圹?should use Alcohol to create the .bwa file." - Why bother 圹
圹?converting bwa files back and forth? mount the damn thing in 圹
圹?a120/DT and play. A120 and DT's virtual drives can recognize bw 圹
圹?format as easily as a120 format. Secondly, its really hard to 圹
圹?stomach that bwas created by a120 are better than bwas created by 圹
圹?blindwrite when you open the bwas in bwabuilder, and compare the 圹
圹?bwas for both NOGRP and STUBBS.THE.ZOMBIE.CLONE-bC releases, and 圹
圹?how crappy they are, to the bwa from MIRROR Proper and how much 圹
圹?better it is. BTW, that bwa file we made is from the retail disc 圹
圹?and created in BWAbuilder 4.5.7. 圹
圹?"1. With the advent of DTool4, one can easily make mini-images of 圹
圹?DVDs. Therefore, clonecds are not superior to clonedvds. Please, 圹
圹?newbie group, do your homework before making unsubstantiated 圹
圹?claims. " - do YOUR homework and research burning methods on dvds.圹
圹?Notice the lack of any real RAW writing? This is needed for 圹
圹?the Twin Sector method to burn, since Twin sector method involves 圹
圹?replacing indencies with errors to fool securom into running. 圹
圹?Lack of RAW DAO also means Safedisc DVD cannot work burn 1:1 圹
圹?because the Safedisc errros need to be burnt RAW. Also, NO 圹
圹?DVD drive has plextor rate variation 1:1. This means Securom DVD 圹
圹?CANNOT be burnt 1:1. This is because Plextor modified all drives 圹
圹?after the premium to block the rate variation method entirely. 圹
圹?Meanwhile, CDS have true RAW writing methods, and the rate 圹
圹?variation technique in plextors. As a result, Safedisc CD can be 圹
圹?burnt 1:1 and Securom CD can be burnt 1:1, or burnt twinsector. 圹
圹?Or how bout a simpler test for simpler minds: Take 圹
圹?The.Matrix.Path.Of.Neo.CloneDVD-MiRROR, which is SecuROM 圹
圹?7.00.00.0014 on DVD, and burn it. Burn it in a120, 4x speed. You 圹
圹?can even enable RPMS. Once your done burning, install it, then 圹
圹?try to play it. It Doesn't work now does it? right, mount it 圹
圹?and use SR7, works fine. This means DVDS only work MOUNTED. 圹
圹?Now, Take 06.27.05.The.Bards.Tale.CD.Version.BWClone-XMAFT, which 圹
圹?has SecuROM 7.00.00.0115, without IDE whoring. Open up everyone's 圹
圹?least favorite program Blindwrite, following the nfo instructions 圹
圹?to burn it and hit yes to include physicall informations. 圹
圹?If you own a Plextor Premium (highly doubt you even heard of) 圹
圹?it should burn a fully 1:1 clone, which will work flawlessley. 圹
圹?If you own a Liteon or other drives, it will burn a 圹
圹?Twin-sectored clone, that will work just as well. Point being, 圹
圹?CDS work burnt, burnt 1:1 and mounted, while DVDS work mounted 圹
圹?only. Just because it works does not mean its Top Quality to us. 圹
圹?All of our releases are above and beyond the requirements, we 圹
圹?take pride in this, and as far as were concenred, oher groups 圹
圹?that want to release shit quality images is just proper fodder 圹
圹?for us. Groups seriously need to get off their hurt egos after a 圹
圹?proper, and learn WHY they have been propered. Then when they 圹
圹?decide to do another release, they look back and avoid the 圹
圹?mistake they did last time. They need to LEARN from their mistake 圹
圹?and stop licking their wounds. This is the point of having nukers 圹
圹?and propers, to keep the quality up. Some people actually do 圹
圹?want quality still. You really want to hurt MiRROR? Start 圹
圹?releasing good unproperable not-shit images so we will actually 圹
圹?have to be faster. 圹
圹?"2. We don't think m0 compression should be propered unless you 圹
圹?are racing, as that is just wasting bandwidth." - That's something圹
圹?we both agree on. ST0N3D was a valid release, nothing wrong with 圹
圹?it. They beat us on releasing it, and we couldn't find anything 圹
圹?wrong with the image itself. Every release should be that good. 圹
圹?"3. 'Use serials from other source' is seriously lame. Make your 圹
圹?own serials or don't release. " - First, We only say this on 圹
圹?releases where its very possible to get your own key. Not every 圹
圹?group has keygenners and we simply choose not to leak our tagged 圹
圹?keys and expose our suppliers when releasing a game, It is too 圹
圹?risky to give away our supplier's keys, hell we don't even ask 圹
圹?them for the key to play it ourselves. We had Battlefield 2 圹
圹?Special Forces DVD and CD days preretail, but our supplier had 圹
圹?a tagged key. We chose not to release it with the tagged key, 圹
圹?simply because we do not have keygenners and we don't want to 圹
圹?expose our suppliers. After PCGAME released BF2SF DVD, We 圹
圹?released the CD version with use serial from other sources simply 圹
圹?because we figured that it is very easy for the end user to go on 圹
圹?a dox site and download a 5 kilobyte keygen. For people to whine 圹
圹?because they are too lazy to look for the other keys is really 圹
圹?pathetic and very unappreciative of the work MiRROR and our 圹
圹?suppliers do. Besides, someone has to proper all those bad 圹
圹?"4. SFclones are not 'true 1:1 copies.' Otherwise, they would 圹
圹?work on burners as well as regular non-burner cdroms just like 圹
圹?the original would. " SFCLONES Are 1:1 copies, if you actually 圹
圹?read some of the nfos we write, it would say Starforce looks for 圹
圹?the ATIP sectors on burnt cds to see if theres anything 圹
圹?indicating its a cdr. IF ATIP says CDR with chemical types, SF 圹
圹?DONT RUN. RETAIL Discs have no atip information. Since CDROMS 圹
圹?cant read atip, it works fine on there. Blame the damned media 圹
圹?manufactueres, or actually blame your favorite program Alcohol 圹
圹?120 for writing a ATIP Blocker that sucks soo bad it only works 圹
圹?on Safedisc. Maybe if A120 Developer team wasn't whoring 圹
圹?emulation soo much then they would have already coded 1:1 methods 圹
圹?of burning securom and have better atip hiders for Starforce, but 圹
圹?I guess you make more money with a app that is required on all 圹
圹?machines to emulate badly imaged clones, than writing an app that 圹
圹?makes true 1:1 clones and works on computers that dont have a120 圹
圹?installed. Awesome marketing a120! Also, if youre too dumb to 圹
圹?know what ATIP is, look it up on cdfreaks, since you beleive that 圹
圹?site more than anything else. Actually, what do you care about 圹
圹?making true quality 1:1 clones that don't need emulation? From the圹
圹?way you bitched in your nfo, and made that crap image, it sounded 圹
圹?like making proper clones will bring the end of the world and 圹
圹?Alcohol with all it's emulation was the second coming of Christ. 圹
圹?And lastly, yes we may be a newly formed group, but our members 圹
圹?are from much older groups. Its really very childish to bash 圹
圹?groups just because they are new, especially since most of these 圹
圹?new groups risk a lot so that you can have the best possible 圹
圹?quality releases for free. 圹
圹?Read our upcoming Q&A for more information and Enjoy this Proper 圹
槽? ? 圹
槽? ? 圹
槽? 捋? 圹
槽? 鄄圮 圹
槽? ?圯 圹
槽? 草 圹
圹? 薏 圹
圹圻 苘苘苘 哌曹苘 圹
圹 懿?? 苘苒哌哌 ?? 哌咣苘 哕圹
鄄?? ? 苒哌 ?? ? 卟圮 捋?
鄄??咣?捋? ??懿? 捋圯 槽?
苓 郾?? ??咣? ?? ? 苘圹? 苒咣?
掭 郾?? ? 哌圮苘 ? 苘苘策哌 苘 薏?圹
圮 郯?? ? 哌哌圮苘 哌哌哌 咣? 咣苒?
斑圮郯? ? 哌圮 捋? 咣?
鼙?圹鄄 ? 苓 捋? ? 苘懿卑? 苒? 捋
薇辈蒉圹? 掭 鄄 苓哌 苘苒哌? 苓 ? 苒?
甙哕圹郯 ? 哕? 膊 ? ? 苒哌 掭 苓 圹
苒?圹 OMG SID ? 卟? 膊 ? 捋 哕 ? 哕 掭 圹
圻 圹 掭懿?薏? 槽 ? 咣? 卟? 咣? 曹 圹
掭 懿苒曹? ? 苘? ?懿? 槽苓 ? 懿? 薏? 薏? 圹
哕 ?捱 ??苒?? 懿? ASCII 卟圯 鞍??鞍 懿? ?? 苒? 苒? 圹
捋苓掭捋?卟?薏? irokos ? ? ?? 苘苘苒圻圮苘策? ? 圹
圯 哕咣苘 咣? <TITAN> ? 鞍北曹? 卟?鞍苘苘苓哌哌曹苘? 圹
捋? 哌苒圻圮苘苓哕苘 捋舶氨辈膊? 哌哌曹苘 哌卟苘 圹
咣圹苘? 哌哌咣圹圹圹脖鞍鞍 槽鄄鞍北膊?鞍鞍鞍鞍鞍北膊苘 哌曹 卟圹
哌咣圹圹圮苘苘苘苘? 捋舶安辈膊? 苘苘??哌圮 咣 捋?
哌哌咣郾圹圹哌咣苘 鞍脖边? 苘圻哌 苘苘 ?薇? 掭 咣?
?哌咣圮 咣 ? 苒? 苘圻哌 ? 圻 ? 鄄
咣? 掭 ? 捋 苒?懿?卟? ? 苘苘苓?
捋? ? ? 陛 捋? 哕苘苘策哌哌哌?
圹 ?MIRROR ? 圹 懿哌甙 ?? ?
薏 咣?哌哌哌斑 圹圻 安 ?? ?
哕薏 ? ? 圹? 懿圮 ?? ?
捋策 膊 弑 ?
圯 ? 北 ?
? 鞍 ?